Chapter 10 — Legislative Process

227

10.1Introduction

The examination and enactment of legislation are key constitutional functions of the Legislative Assembly. This primary law-making function is derived from the Constitution Act, 1867 (previously known as the British North America Act, 1867), and is also referenced in the provincial Constitution Act (R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 66, s. 17), which empowers the Lieutenant Governor to make laws by and with the advice and consent of the Legislative Assembly in and for British Columbia, subject to the Constitution Act, 1867.

Proposed legislation is presented in a document called a “bill.” The Member who introduces a bill is known as the bill’s “sponsor.” It is an undisputable right of all Members of the Legislative Assembly to have their views put before the Assembly in the form of a bill.

Members spend a considerable portion of time during sittings of the Legislative Assembly studying and debating bills. They explore arguments for and against each bill, and consider the views and concerns of British Columbians prior to deciding to support, amend or reject the bill.

It is an undisputable right of all Members of the Legislative Assembly to have their views put before the Assembly in the form of a bill.

A bill must pass through a number of stages before it becomes a law. This process begins with the introduction of a bill in the Legislative Assembly and ends with the granting of Royal Assent, at which point the bill becomes an act. The provincial Interpretation Act (R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 238, s. 1) provides that an act “means an Act of the Legislature, whether referred to as a statute, code or by any other name, and, when referring to past legislation, includes an ordinance or proclamation made before 1871, that has the force of the law.”

The Legislature of British Columbia has two components: the Legislative Assembly and the Sovereign, represented by the Lieutenant Governor. The first clause of a bill 228 is preceded by an enacting clause, as provided in the provincial Interpretation Act (s. 10): “Her Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Legislative Assembly of the Province of British Columbia, enacts as follows….” The enacting clause is an essential part of a bill, for it states the authority under which it is enacted. Approval of a bill in the same form is required by both the Legislative Assembly and the Lieutenant Governor prior to a bill becoming a law.

This chapter outlines the types of bills, the typical structure of a bill, the stages of consideration that a bill must pass as it makes its way through the legislative process, applications for accelerated consideration of a bill, and other related matters.

10.2Types of Bills

All bills may be divided into two major classes: public and private. Private bills are discussed in Chapter 16 (Private Bills).

A public bill relates to a matter of public policy and is usually general in its application and character. Typically, the first object of a public bill is to alter the general law or to enact new proposals of general application. Such bills may enact a new law or may amend an existing law. Public bills can be initiated by a Minister (Member of the Executive Council, or the Government) or by a Private Member. If passed, a public bill applies to everyone throughout the province in accordance with its terms.

229

10.2.1Government Bills

A public bill introduced by a Minister is known as a government bill, which is reflective of government policy. Government bills are numbered from 1 to 200; the numbering is reset to 1 at the beginning of every Session. Numbering is assigned in the manner determined by the government. Therefore, government bills are not necessarily introduced sequentially according to their numbering. In practice, government bills are introduced by a message from the Lieutenant Governor for reasons noted in section 10.2.1.1, and thus may also be referred to as “message bills.”

Standing Order 76 requires that any bill that proposes to amend the provincial Constitution Act be introduced by a Minister. In the past, Speakers have ruled Private Members’ bills out of order on the provision of Standing Order 76 (see B.C. Journals, April 2, 1969, p. 229; October 17, 1953, p. 73; October 1, 1953, p. 32).

10.2.1.1Message Bills

The provincial Constitution Act (ss. 46, 47) sets out that:

Standing Orders 66 and 67 mirror section 47 of the provincial Constitution Act, setting out that any bills involving taxation or expenditure of public money must be introduced by message from the Crown. This necessity flows from section 54 of the Constitution Act, 1867, and its application to the provinces is extended pursuant to section 90. Other Canadian and Commonwealth jurisdictions refer to this as the “Royal Recommendation.” Message bills are important to the financial procedures of the Legislative Assembly, further outlined in Chapter 12 (Financial Procedures).

230

Upon the presentation of a government bill by message, the recommendation of the Lieutenant Governor is read by the Speaker and is then printed in the Votes and Proceedings.

10.2.1.2 Bill 1 — Pro Forma Bill

At the opening of every Session of a Parliament, immediately after the Lieutenant Governor retires from the Chamber after delivering the Speech from the Throne, a Minister, usually the Attorney General, introduces Bill 1, An Act to Ensure the Supremacy of Parliament (in the past, the bill has also been called An Act to Perpetuate a Parliamentary Right). The bill is not introduced by message. In the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia, this practice is recorded in the Journals on two occasions in the mid-1970s and was solidified in 1978. This bill, known as a pro forma bill, affirms the independence of the Legislative Assembly from the Crown to conduct its proceedings and to legislate, regardless of the reasons stated in the Speech from the Throne for convening the Assembly. As noted in the bill (see Bill 1 — 2019, Fourth Session, 41st Parliament):

As is common in other Commonwealth jurisdictions, after introduction and first reading, the pro forma bill is not proceeded with further and is not subject to debate.

10.2.1.3Supply Bills

Supply bills deal with the budgetary appropriation process, which is outlined in greater detail in Chapter 12 (Financial Procedures). Supply bills may be categorized as:

1.  Interim supply, which authorizes expenditure of a portion of the budget while the budgetary estimates are under consideration.

2.  Final supply, which authorizes expenditure of the total of the budgetary estimates, including the amount included in any interim supply act.

3.  Supplementary supply, which authorizes the expenditure of estimates over and above the amount contained in the Main Estimates.

231

Interim supply bills provide for an appropriation required by government to conduct its activities from April 1, the beginning of the fiscal year, to the date when the Legislative Assembly is anticipated to have completed its final supply process. This typically covers a period of two months, though a longer period of time may be required during an election year.

Final and supplementary supply bills are unique in that they enact an appropriation pursuant to a resolution of the Committee of Supply. As the details of expenditure have been determined in the Committee of Supply, the passage of the bill is considered an administrative act. The bill is not subject to debate and may not be amended, except to correct a drafting or typographical error. Furthermore, Standing Order 81 does not apply to final and supplementary supply bills, so as to limit the number of stages the bill may pass through in one day. Further information is provided in section 10.11.5.

10.2.1.4Bills to Amend a Number of Miscellaneous Statutes

Government bills entitled Miscellaneous Statute Amendment Act are introduced regularly in the Legislative Assembly, and are not considered omnibus bills, as they do not seek to amend, repeal or enact several acts within a single bill. Even though such bills usually amend a number of acts that may fall within the area of responsibility of several Ministers, they are introduced by the Attorney General. By convention, such bills are typically limited to making minor amendments to numerous acts (see A Guide to Legislation and Legislative Process in British Columbia (August 2013) – Part 2: Principles of Legislative Drafting, pp. 16-7).

10.2.1.5Bill Resulting from Initiative Petition

Pursuant to the Recall and Initiative Act (R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 398), a registered voter in British Columbia may submit an application for an initiative petition, which may result in the introduction of a bill in the Legislative Assembly. The legislative proposal may be the creation of a new law or an amendment to an existing law over which the Legislative Assembly has authority. In Canada, this initiative legislation is unique to British Columbia.

A registered voter in British Columbia may submit an application for an initiative petition, which may result in the introduction of a bill in the Legislative Assembly. In Canada, this initiative legislation is unique to British Columbia.

In submitting an application for consideration to the Chief Electoral Officer under the Recall and Initiative Act, the applicant must, amongst other requirements, provide a copy of a draft bill for introduction in the Legislative Assembly. Once the application is approved by the Chief Electoral Officer, the applicant must then collect signatures from 10 percent of the registered voters in each of the province’s electoral districts within 90 days for the initiative petition to succeed.

232

If the applicant is successful in fulfilling the requirements of the Recall and Initiative Act, the Chief Electoral Officer must send a copy of the petition and draft bill to the Select Standing Committee on Legislative Initiatives, pursuant to section 10 of the Act. In accordance with section 11 of the Act, the Committee may recommend that the Chief Electoral Officer hold an initiative vote under the Act, or it may table a report in the Legislative Assembly recommending that the draft bill be introduced at the earliest opportunity.

Pursuant to section 12 of the Recall and Initiative Act:

Therefore, under the provisions of the Recall and Initiative Act, a government bill may be introduced not necessarily as a reflection of government policy but as a reflection of public will. There has only been one successful initiative petition in British Columbia, which resulted in an initiative vote in 2011.

10.2.2Private Members’ Bills

A public bill introduced by Members who are not a Member of the Executive Council (Cabinet) is known formally as a Public Bill in the Hands of a Private Member, but it is more commonly referred to as a Private Member’s bill. Private Members’ bills are required to be introduced with two days’ notice, pursuant to Standing Order 48(1). Once introduced, Private Members’ bills are numbered from M 201 to M 400; the numbering is reset to M 201 at the beginning of every Session. Unlike government bills, Private Members’ bills are assigned a number sequentially in the order that they are introduced in the Legislative Assembly.

Private Members’ bills may seek to amend an act or create a new one. These bills are subject to numerous restrictions on the matters that they may address, as outlined below.

In the Legislative Assembly, it has been the practice to permit proponents of Private Members’ bills to make a brief statement on second reading before a ruling on the bill, but the Speaker has the right to decide at any time whether the bill conforms to the rules set out in statute and in the Standing Orders. In British Columbia and in other 233 jurisdictions, the practice is to have the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly or the Law Clerk examine such bills after introduction and first reading, with a view to report to the Speaker as to whether a bill conforms to the rules. Any bill which does not conform to the rules would then be withdrawn by the Member or ruled out of order by the Speaker when second reading is called, and before any debate thereon.

A public bill introduced by Members who are not a Member of the Executive Council (Cabinet) is known formally as a Public Bill in the Hands of a Private Member, but it is more commonly referred to as a Private Member’s bill.

Speaker Barisoff noted the following in a statement on Private Members’ bills (B.C. Journals, October 23, 2007, p. 130):

234

10.2.2.1Restrictions on Matters Addressed in Private Members’ Bills

Access to the Crown is a collective privilege of the Legislative Assembly, exercised through the Speaker. Ministers enjoy access to the Crown by virtue of their appointment to the Executive Council. Individual Private Members do not enjoy access to the Crown. Therefore, the matters which Private Members can introduce by way of a bill in the Legislative Assembly are very limited constitutionally, as Private Members are unable to obtain a Royal Recommendation in order to introduce a bill by message.

The practical effect of section 47 of the provincial Constitution Act and Standing Order 67 is that only Ministers may introduce any measures that involve the appropriation of public revenue or the introduction of any tax or impost that may be properly considered by the Legislative Assembly. Further information on the Legislative Assembly’s role in appropriations and taxation is outlined in Chapter 12 (Financial Procedures).

Standing Order 76 requires bills that affect the provincial Constitution Act to be introduced by a Minister. Furthermore, Speakers have ruled that, in keeping with a longstanding convention, Private Members’ bills cannot touch upon the prerogatives of the Crown (see decision of Speaker Barisoff, B.C. Journals, February 27, 2006, p. 26).

10.2.3Speaker Cannot Sever Bills

Given the vast nature and scope of certain bills, Members have previously made appeals to the Speaker to sever a single bill into separate bills. In a decision on this matter, Speaker Barnes noted the following (B.C. Journals, July 10, 1995, pp. 152-3):

235

Speaker Hartley upheld Speaker Barnes’s decision that the Speaker does not have authority to sever a bill (see B.C. Journals, April 2, 2000, p. 19).

10.3Formation and Drafting of Bills

Former practice in the Legislative Assembly permitted a bill to be introduced in blank form, which was a “dummy bill” bearing the title and names of Members supporting the bill. Standing Order 75 no longer permits this practice, and Speakers have had to consider the question of actual content and form to determine whether a bill as presented offends Standing Order 75.

It is a significant undertaking to ensure that bills are drafted using proper form and language, taking into account the effect of the bill on other laws or regulations, and to ensure that the intent of the bill is clear to other Members of the Legislative Assembly, as well as to the public, to those who administer the law, to law enforcement officials and to judges.

As noted in House of Commons Procedure and Practice: “A bill in blank or in an imperfect shape is a bill which has only a title, or the drafting of which has not been completed” (3rd ed., p. 734). On one occasion in British Columbia, Speaker Shantz held that explanations or comments printed on the reverse of a bill, as submitted to the Legislative Assembly, did not constitute a bill in “blank or imperfect shape” (see B.C. Journals, March 18 and 20, 1959, pp. 209, 225). However, other authorities have concluded that argumentative material is not permitted, even on a memorandum accompanying a bill (see Erskine May, 21st ed., p. 470), and therefore such material would be even more 236 offensive if printed on the bill itself. The current practice in the Legislative Assembly is for a short explanatory statement to be delivered by the bill’s sponsor on introduction of the bill, further outlined in section 10.4.1.

Several interesting points have been considered by Speakers in relation to this procedural rule. Standing Order 68(3) in the House of Commons of Canada is identical to Standing Order 75 in the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia. A point of order pertaining to the House of Commons Standing Order was raised at second reading of a bill, when a Member argued that the bill being considered incorporated, by reference, certain provisions of other statutes, which were still before a parliamentary committee. Speaker Lamoureux ruled as follows (House of Commons (Canada) Hansard, April 20, 1970, pp. 6047-8):

10.3.1Drafting of Government Bills

The provincial government dedicates a significant amount of time and resources to the preparation, drafting and production of bills. The process begins with the preparation 237 of a policy direction that falls within the scope of a particular ministry or provincial jurisdiction broadly. Once a policy initiative has been approved by a Minister after the required policy groundwork, the proposal will be eventually presented to a Cabinet committee.

As noted in A Guide to Legislation and Legislative Process in British Columbia (August 2013) — Part 1: The Legislative Process:

A report outlining these considerations is included in a Minister’s submission to a Cabinet committee, and the committee will then make a recommendation to Cabinet. If Cabinet approves proceeding with the policy initiative, drafting of a bill begins.

Government bills are drafted by lawyers who specialize in legislative drafting in the Office of Legislative Counsel within the Government of British Columbia. These public servants ensure that bills are drafted in an appropriate manner, in accordance with modern legislative drafting standards and required formatting. Once a bill has gone through the necessary drafting and editing stages, it is presented to a Cabinet committee. It is then up to the committee to recommend the bill to Cabinet, who will provide final approval prior to the bill’s introduction in the Legislative Assembly.

10.3.2Drafting of Private Members’ Bills

In drafting a Private Member’s bill, Members can request the assistance of the Law Clerk, who will help ensure that the bill is drafted using proper language and formatting. Members may wish to seek the opinion of the Law Clerk on the bill’s constitutionality prior to its introduction in the Legislative Assembly. Since 2017, the Office of Legislative Counsel within the Government of British Columbia has also provided legislative drafting services to Members to assist with the drafting of Private Members’ bills and amendments to all bills.

10.4Stages of Consideration of a Bill by the Legislative Assembly

In keeping with the Westminster parliamentary system, bills presented in the Legislative Assembly must proceed through three readings and committee consideration prior to being presented to the Lieutenant Governor for Royal Assent. Bills go through “readings” because, long before literacy was common and the printing press was in general use, handwritten bills were read aloud three times to Members by a Clerk at the Table in the early history of Parliament at Westminster.

238

The stages of consideration that a bill must go through in the Legislative Assembly are:

Not debatable and not amendable

1. First reading

Debatable and amendable

2. Second reading

3. Committee stage

4. Report stage (the practice in B.C. is not to debate this stage)

5. Third reading

Once a bill passes through these stages in the Legislative Assembly, it must also receive Royal Assent before becoming a law. A distinction may be drawn between “stages” of a bill and “readings.” There are three readings required for each bill, but there are several stages that a bill must pass through before becoming law, which include committee stage, report stage and Royal Assent.

In usual circumstances, in accordance with the Standing Orders, the stages of consideration of a bill are proceeded with on different sitting days, in order to provide Members time to examine the bill and seek input from their constituents and stakeholders. The latter provision of Standing Order 81 is addressed in section 10.11.

The custom in the Legislative Assembly has been for debate on bills to primarily take place at second reading (principle of the bill) and committee stage (detailed consideration of the bill).

The custom in the Legislative Assembly has been for debate on bills to primarily take place at second reading (principle of the bill) and committee stage (detailed consideration of the bill). The practice in B.C. has been for limited debate to take place at third reading of a bill. Third reading is the final decisive stage of consideration of a bill by the Legislative Assembly.

239

10.4.1Introduction and First Reading

At every sitting of the Legislative Assembly, a Clerk at the Table will call “Introduction of Bills” during Routine Business (see Standing Order 25). When a Member wishing to introduce a bill is recognized by the Speaker, the Member will introduce the bill by stating its title, pursuant to Standing Order 74, and briefly outlining its purpose, as provided for in Practice Recommendation 5.

The purpose of introduction and first reading of bills is for the Legislative Assembly to agree to an order allowing the bill to be introduced, so that it may be printed and distributed to all Members and be made available to the public. Introduction and first reading are a single formal stage and are taken together. Upon the introduction and first reading of a bill in the Legislative Assembly, the bill formally enters the legislative process.

10.4.1.1Introduction of a Bill by Message

Government bills are introduced by a Minister presenting a message — i.e., the Lieutenant Governor formally recommends the consideration of the bill to the Legislative Assembly, consistent with Standing Orders 66 and 67. While typically introduced when “Introduction of Bills” is called during Routine Business, government bills brought forward by message may be introduced at any time, as long as it takes place during a break in the proceedings (see B.C. Journals, July 13, 1998, pp. 135-6).

10.4.1.2Introduction of a Bill by Notice

Government bills not introduced by message and all Private Members’ bills must be introduced with two days’ notice, pursuant to Standing Order 48(1). Further information on notices is outlined in Chapter 9 (Motions).

240

10.4.1.3Motion Moved upon the Introduction of a Bill

Apart from the short introductory statement provided for in Practice Recommendation 5 to simply explain the bill’s purpose, the motion for first reading of a bill is not subject to amendment or debate, pursuant to Standing Order 78 (see decision of Speaker Brown, House of Commons (U.K.) Hansard, November 12, 1946, vol. 430, c. 3). A Speaker has held that even points of order should not be raised on this motion but should instead be raised after first reading (see decision of Speaker Whittaker, B.C. Journals, November 17, 1939, pp. 39-40).

The motion for first reading of a bill provides the Legislative Assembly with a first opportunity to decide whether it wishes to consider a bill. As the bill has not yet been distributed to Members at this point, this determination is based on the information provided in the explanatory statement made by the sponsor of the bill. While rare, a motion for introduction and first reading may be subject to a division call (standing vote) and may be negatived (see B.C. Journals, June 26, 2017, pp. 17-8).

If the motion for first reading of a bill is adopted, the bill’s sponsor will subsequently move that the bill be placed on the Order Paper for second reading. Although a division may be called, this second motion is purely procedural and is not subject to amendment or debate (see statement of Speaker Barisoff, B.C. Journals, March 30, 2010, p. 36).

10.4.1.4Introduction Not in Order — Same Matter in Same Session

If a bill introduced is substantially the same as a previous bill upon which the Legislative Assembly has expressed its judgment in the same Session, it will be found out of order (see decision of Speaker Jones, B.C. Journals, March 19, 1930, p. 167; see also Erskine May, 25th ed., §28.17, pp. 634-6). However, if a bill has been withdrawn after having made progress, another bill with the same objects may be proceeded with (see Erskine May, 25th ed., §28.17, pp. 634-6).

If debate on a bill results in a dropped order, the bill’s consideration by the Legislative Assembly may be revived upon the Assembly adopting a motion to that effect. Further information on dropped orders is outlined in Chapter 5 (Sitting Days and Business).

241

10.4.1.5Administrative Procedures Following Introduction of a Bill

Standing Order 87 charges the Law Clerk with the revision of bills after first reading, to certify their correctness. This typically refers to form and legal aspects of the bill.

Standing Order 88 complements Standing Order 87, and provides the types of revisions that are in order for the Law Clerk to make to a bill after first reading. In practice in the Legislative Assembly, the Law Clerk’s power of “deletion, substitution or addition” is used sparingly, and is intended to permit the Law Clerk to make “surgical” modifications to bills, limited to correction of printing, simple grammatical corrections or other patent errors.

10.4.2Second Reading

Second reading stage consideration of a bill provides Members with an opportunity to debate the bill’s general principles and objectives. “The second reading is the first important stage through which the bill is required to pass; its whole principle is at issue, and is affirmed or denied by the House” (Erskine May, 25th ed., §28.45, p. 647). Second reading debate takes place when it is called by the Government House Leader under the Orders of the Day, and is not confined to a single sitting; it often takes place over the course of several sittings, depending on the length and subject matter of the bill.

242

Pursuant to Standing Order 79, a motion for second reading of a bill is out of order unless the bill has been printed and distributed, which results in the notation “PRINTED” appearing next to the bill’s title on the Orders of the Day (the Order Paper).

Government bills are distributed in printed form immediately after introduction. Thus, they are designated as “PRINTED” on the Order Paper.

Second reading stage consideration of a bill provides Members with an opportunity to debate the bill’s general principles and objectives.

Private Members’ bills are only printed after review by the Law Clerk, in accordance with Standing Orders 87 and 88. They are placed on the Orders of the Day for second reading, and until they are printed, they are designated as “NOT PRINTED” on the Order Paper. While a bill is so designated, it cannot be called for second reading, as it is not yet in a form to be reviewed by all Members.

10.4.2.1Amendments on Order Paper — No Effect on Second Reading Consideration of a Bill

Notice may be given by the sponsor of a bill, or any other Member, of the intention to propose amendments to a bill at committee consideration, when amendments affecting specific provisions or clauses of a bill are considered. Such proposed amendments are published on the Order Paper until they are disposed of in committee.

Upon a point of order being raised by a Member that consideration of a bill at second reading is inappropriate given that a number of amendments to the bill appeared on the Order Paper, Speaker Smith ruled “that the motion for second reading of the bill should be proceeded with and that any question as to inadmissibility of amendments would be a question for committee on the bill, when and if such amendments be moved” (B.C. Journals, June 14, 1978, p. 120). This is consistent with the purpose of second reading debate, which provides an opportunity for Members to consider the bill’s general principles and objectives.

243

10.4.2.2Conclusion of Debate at Second Reading

Typically, when no further Members wish to speak on debate on a bill at second reading, the mover of the motion for second reading may speak to close the debate, after which debate is concluded, and the Speaker puts the question on the motion. If the motion for second reading is adopted, the sponsor of the bill moves the bill’s committal to a committee. Notice of this committal motion is not required. It is also not subject to amendment or debate, as it is administrative in nature (see decision of Speaker Barisoff, B.C. Journals, April 27, 2010, p. 56). If the motion is negatived, the bill is rejected and subsequently no longer appears on the Order Paper.

10.4.3Second Reading — Motions to Amend a Bill

At second reading stage consideration, the following three motions in amendment to a bill may be moved, all of which are debatable:

1. Six months’ hoist.

2. Reasoned amendment.

3. Referral of the subject matter of the bill to a parliamentary committee.

All three motions are available to be put before the Legislative Assembly for consideration at second reading and at third reading debate.

The intent of these motions is dilatory in nature. If passed, the adoption of any of the three possible types of motions listed above would effectively reject the bill and remove it from the Legislative Assembly’s consideration, with the exception of the third option (further explained below).

In earlier years, other more dramatic methods were used, as described in Erskine May:

244

10.4.3.1Six Months’ Hoist Amendment

The objective of a hoist amendment is to critically postpone the consideration of the bill at second or third reading, with the intent that the delay will be fatal to the bill as a result of prorogation or dissolution. While flexibility is accorded to the duration of the delay in other Commonwealth jurisdictions, the practice in B.C. since the late 1800s (when three-month hoist amendments were last used) has been to postpone the reading for six months. As noted in Erskine May:

If a hoist amendment is adopted, the bill is deemed withdrawn from the Order Paper for the remainder of the Session in which it was presented (see House of Commons Procedure and Practice, 3rd ed., pp. 751-3).

A hoist amendment may be moved without notice, and is not subject to subamendment (see decision of Speaker Davidson, B.C. Journals, October 5, 1983, p. 214; see also Beauchesne, 6th ed., §669, p. 200). Debate on a hoist amendment may be adjourned, and takes precedence over the question on second or third reading of the bill (depending on the stage at which the amendment is introduced), until the amendment motion is disposed of.

If a hoist amendment is negatived, debate on the motion for second reading of the bill continues until the motion is disposed of (if the amendment was introduced at second reading).

Only one hoist amendment may be moved at second and at third reading of a bill.

Speaker Davidson found that if a hoist amendment was previously negatived, the Legislative Assembly made a determination that the word “now” would stand as part of the question before the Assembly, and that a second dilatory motion to the same effect is out of order (see B.C. Journals, September 29, 1983, p. 193).

In the House of Commons of Canada, “Attempts to apply the hoist amendment to a resolution or to include it in the text of a reasoned amendment have been ruled out of order by the Chair” (House of Commons Procedure and Practice, 3rd ed., p. 753). Beauchesne reinforces that a six months’ hoist and a reasoned amendment cannot be moved in the same motion (6th ed., §667(1), p. 200).

245

10.4.3.1.1Form of Six Months’ Hoist Amendment

A hoist amendment moved by a Member will typically be as follows: “I move that the motion for second (or third) reading of bill (bill number) intituled (name of bill) be amended by deleting the word ‘now’ and substituting ‘six months hence.’”

10.4.3.2Reasoned Amendment

A reasoned amendment may be moved by a Member who desires to place their particular reasons for opposing the second or third reading of a bill on the record as part of the motion. The motion presented by the Member deletes and replaces all the words in the main motion on second or third reading of the bill after the word “that,” and adds other subsequent words (see Erskine May, 25th ed., §§28.46-28.48, pp. 648-50; see also B.C. Votes and Proceedings, March 26, 2019, p. 2; B.C. Journals, May 13, 2002, p. 115). A reasoned amendment must relate strictly to the bill in question (see decisions of Speaker Davidson, B.C. Journals, September 28, 1983, pp. 187-8).

As outlined in House of Commons Procedure and Practice:

246

If a reasoned amendment is adopted, no further consideration of the bill takes place (see Erskine May, 25th ed., §28.47, p. 649), and the bill is consequently removed from the Order Paper. If a reasoned amendment is negatived, debate on the motion for second or third reading of the bill continues until the motion is disposed of.

A reasoned amendment may be moved without notice. It is not subject to subamendment (see decisions of Speaker Davidson, B.C. Journals, September 22, 1983, p. 170). Debate on a reasoned amendment may be adjourned, and takes precedence over the motion for second or third reading of the bill (depending on the stage at which the amendment is introduced), until the amendment motion is disposed of.

Only one reasoned amendment may be moved at second and at third reading of a bill (see Bourinot, 4th ed., p. 320; Erskine May, 25th ed., §28.48, pp. 649-50).

A reasoned amendment and a six months’ hoist amendment cannot be moved in the same motion (see Beauchesne, 6th ed., §667(1), p. 200). A reasoned amendment cannot oppose the principle of a bill and also refer its subject matter to a committee; it must do one or the other (see Beauchesne, 6th ed., §667(2), p. 200).

10.4.3.2.1Form of Reasoned Amendment

A reasoned amendment moved by a Member may be as follows: “I move that the motion for second (or third) reading of bill (bill number) intituled (name of bill) be amended by deleting all the words after ‘that’ and substituting therefore the following: (text).”

10.4.3.3Referral of the Subject Matter of a Bill to a Parliamentary Committee

A motion to refer the subject matter of a bill to a parliamentary committee may not always be dilatory in nature (the use of such a substantive motion is outlined in section 10.5). When used as a dilatory tactic, the Member’s motion would propose that the bill be withdrawn and that its subject matter be referred to a parliamentary committee for consideration. The effect of the motion in amendment is to delete all the words in the main motion for second or third reading of the bill after the word “that,” replacing them with “the subject matter of this bill be referred to the Select Standing Committee on (committee name) for consideration and report” (see B.C. Journals, March 16, 1961, p. 132).

An amendment to refer the subject matter of a bill to a parliamentary committee cannot refer any parts of the bill itself for study by the committee (see Beauchesne, 6th ed., §674(1), p. 201). It is not in order to use such a dilatory motion to refer the subject matter of a bill to a Committee of the Whole (see Beauchesne, 6th ed., §675(2), p. 202). Furthermore, the subject matter of a bill cannot be referred to a parliamentary committee that has not yet been appointed (see Beauchesne, 6th ed., §675(1), p. 202).

247

As noted in House of Commons Procedure and Practice:

If an amendment to refer the subject matter of a bill to a parliamentary committee is adopted, the committee to which the matter was referred conducts a study accordingly. As with any terms of reference for a committee, unless the motion adopted by the Legislative Assembly specifies a deadline for reporting the committee’s findings to the Assembly, the committee may do so within its own time frame.

If an amendment to refer the subject matter of a bill to a parliamentary committee is negatived, debate on the motion for second or third reading of the bill continues until the motion is disposed of.

An amendment to refer the subject matter of a bill to a parliamentary committee may be moved without notice, and is not subject to subamendment. Until the motion is disposed of, debate on the amendment may be adjourned, and takes precedence over the main motion for second or third reading of the bill (depending on the stage at which the amendment is introduced).

Only one amendment to refer the subject matter of a bill to a parliamentary committee may be moved at second and at third reading of any bill (see decision of Speaker Shantz, B.C. Journals, March 16, 1961, p. 133; see also Bourinot, 4th ed., p. 320).

As noted in a decision of Speaker Shantz: “The House cannot both refuse to give the Bill second reading and refer some provisions of the Bill to a committee…” (B.C. Journals, March 16, 1961, p. 132). Therefore, it is not in order to move a motion to refer the subject matter of a bill to committee and to oppose its principle by way of a reasoned amendment (see Beauchesne, 6th ed., §667(2), p. 200).

10.4.3.3.1Form of Motion in Amendment to Refer Subject Matter of a Bill to a Parliamentary Committee

An amendment moved by a Member to refer the subject matter of a bill to a parliamentary committee may be as follows: “I move that the motion for second (or third) reading of bill (bill number) intituled (name of bill) be amended by deleting all the words after ‘that’ and substituting therefore the following: ‘Bill (bill number) intituled (name of bill) not be read a second (or third) time now, but that the subject matter be referred to the Select Standing Committee/Special Committee on (name of committee) [and further that (text of any further details, if applicable)].’”

248

10.4.4Committal of a Bill — Consideration in Committee

The term “committal of a bill” refers to the act of sending it to a committee for examination. A committal carries with it the power to amend, whereas a referral is for the purpose of obtaining an opinion or observation. In B.C., the practice has been for all public bills to be considered by a Committee of the Whole. This differs from many other Commonwealth jurisdictions, where public bills are considered by a parliamentary committee, where witnesses are invited to provide information to help with the committee’s in-depth consideration of a bill. Further information on Committees of the Whole and their procedures is outlined in Chapter 11 (Committees of the Whole).

The term “committal of a bill” refers to the act of sending it to a committee for examination. A committal carries with it the power to amend, whereas a referral is for the purpose of obtaining an opinion or observation.

At committee consideration, the bill is examined in detail, on a clause-by-clause basis (bills have clauses, and acts have sections). The committee stage debate is not an opportunity to re-examine arguments relating to the principles of the bill, which are canvassed at second reading debate.

As all Members are part of a Committee of the Whole, they all have a right to ask questions at committee stage. Questions are typically only answered by the sponsor of the bill. Questions tend to be detailed and at times technical in nature, allowing Members to gain a better understanding of the meaning and purpose of each clause. Committee consideration of a bill can last from a few hours to several days, depending on the content and complexity of the bill.

As set out in Standing Order 84, clauses are dealt with in the order set out in the bill but may be postponed until later — i.e., debate and a subsequent vote are postponed, or stood down. Standing Order 84(2) simply requires the postponed clause to be considered before the consideration of the bill is reported to the Legislative Assembly. Therefore, the committee could report progress on a bill after having deferred a clause, and return to that clause any time before consideration of the bill is reported complete.

249

In considering clauses, the Chair will simply ask whether a clause carries — called “putting the question” — without a motion to that effect being put. After all clauses have been examined, consideration is then given to any schedules included in the bill. The preamble, if any, and then the title, are dealt with last. A request for the preamble or title to be recorded as adopted “on division” is permissible, as is a division call (standing vote). Any part of a bill being considered in committee at the time that the Chair puts the question can be adopted “on division” or be subject to a division call.

10.4.4.1Amendments at Committee Consideration

The function of a committee on a bill is to go through the text of the bill clause by clause and, if necessary, word by word, with a view to accepting the bill as committed or making amendments to it as may seem likely to render it more generally acceptable (see Erskine May, 25th ed., §28.80, p. 666).

The granting or enacting words of a bill (the enacting clause) are to be distinguished from the preamble. The former are never submitted to the committee and are therefore not subject to amendment (see decision of Speaker Irwin, B.C. Journals, March 30, 1954, pp. 87-8).

Amendments to a clause of a bill are moved at committee stage. “Amendments may be made in every part of a bill, whether in the title, preamble, clauses or schedules; clauses may be omitted; new clauses and schedules may be added” (Beauchesne, 6th ed., §694, p. 206). Amendments may be proposed in committee without notice. However, the recommended practice, particularly with lengthy or technical amendments, is to give notice to allow Members the opportunity to review the proposed text (see decision of Deputy Speaker Chouhan, B.C. Journals, November 23, 2017, p. 70).

Amendments to a clause of a bill are moved at committee stage.

Amendments to a specific clause must be strictly relevant to the clause under consideration. Generally speaking, amendments in committee are not in order if such amendments would have the effect of nullifying the principle of the bill, as agreed to at second reading (see Erskine May, 25th ed., §28.80, p. 666). There are, however, several ways in which a committee on a bill may effectively put an end to a bill, as noted in Erskine May:

250

There are certain rules of admissibility relating to amendments. The fact that an amendment is drafted in proper legal form does not necessarily guarantee that it is procedurally in order. If a point of order is raised, the Chair is responsible for ruling on the admissibility of amendments. An amendment is inadmissible if it:

1. Is irrelevant or beyond the scope of the bill.

2. Alters the principle of the bill, as agreed to at second reading.

3. Destroys the effect of clauses already agreed to by the committee.

4. Purports to amend acts not related to the bill.

5. Renders the clause unintelligible.

6. Amounts to a direct negative of the clause.

7. Imposes a charge, extends its object, or proposes or alters, or qualifies the destination of grants (these amendments are available to the government to introduce by message).

8. Purports to delete a clause (a clause should instead be voted against).

9. Is frivolous.

10. Amends the preamble in absence of an amendment to a clause in the bill (see B.C. Journals, April 20, 1995, p. 31).

11. Amends an agreement attached to a bill to confirm an agreement (see decision of Deputy Speaker Hartley, B.C. Journals, January 14, 1999, pp. 189-90, further outlined below; see also Erskine May, 25th ed., §28.107, p. 684).

As reinforced in a decision of Deputy Speaker Chouhan (B.C. Journals, November 23, 2017, p. 70):

251

10.4.4.2Limitation on Amendments to a Bill to Confirm an Agreement

Bills to confirm agreements, such as treaties, customarily have the agreement attached as a schedule, and include provisions necessary to perfect the agreement. The agreement or treaty is not amendable, as it is already in existence. For example, during the Legislative Assembly’s consideration at committee stage of a bill to enact the Nisga’a Final Agreement Act, Deputy Speaker Hartley, the Committee Chair, made the following statement (B.C. Journals, January 14, 1999, pp. 189-90):

252

These findings were further upheld by the Chair of a committee examining another agreement bill (see B.C. Journals, October 29, 2007, p. 135).

10.4.5Report Stage

After committee stage is completed, the bill is reported to the Legislative Assembly as

a. complete without amendment, or

b. complete with amendment.

This is known as report stage of the bill. In other Commonwealth jurisdictions, bills reported from parliamentary committees are debatable and are subject to amendment in the House. In the Legislative Assembly, debate is permitted on the report stage of a bill pursuant to Standing Order 85; however, the longstanding practice in the Assembly has been for debate to not be entertained at this stage. The reason for this practice is that all bills considered in committee are typically considered by a Committee of the Whole, as opposed to a parliamentary committee, where only a limited number of Members would have an opportunity to participate in the debate. As noted in Beauchesne, report stage “is intended to be an opportunity for Members who were not members of the committee to propose specific amendments not dealt with by the committee” (6th ed., §714, p. 211). This notion is reinforced in the Standing Orders of the House of Commons (Canada), where Standing Order 76.1(12) stipulates: “The consideration of the report stage of a bill from a Committee of the Whole shall be received and forthwith disposed of, without amendment or debate.” [Emphasis added.]

Given that all Members of the Legislative Assembly have a right to participate in a Committee of the Whole on a bill, the practice in British Columbia has been for debate and proposed amendments to be dealt with during committee proceedings. It would be difficult for Members to engage in debate at report stage that would not duplicate the debate permitted in committee or anticipate debate on the third reading of the bill. No parliamentary opportunity to debate the contents of the bill is lost, simply because it has not been the practice in B.C. to debate at report stage.

253

After the presentation of the report on a bill from a Committee of the Whole, its adoption is not moved, as is done in other Commonwealth jurisdictions. Rather, in the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia, the report of the committee is deemed to be adopted, and the question before the Assembly at that juncture is third reading of the bill.

When a committee reports a bill complete without amendment, the practice in B.C. has been to proceed to third reading of the bill immediately, as permitted in Standing Order 85.

When a committee reports a bill complete with amendment, the report bill is reprinted in redline form, showing deletions as struck out and additions as underlined. This is consistent with Standing Order 80, which stipulates that a bill cannot be proceeded with further until it has been reprinted and distributed to Members in its amended form, which results in the notation “PRINTED” appearing next to the bill’s title on the Orders of the Day (the Order Paper).

After the presentation of the report on a bill from a Committee of the Whole, its adoption is not moved; the report of the committee is deemed to be adopted, and the question before the Legislative Assembly at that juncture is third reading of the bill.

Upon the report of a bill with amendment, there have been two approaches taken in the Legislative Assembly to proceed to the third reading stage. The appropriate and preferred practice is for the sponsor of the bill to move that it be placed on the Order Paper to be read a third time at the next sitting day, in accordance with Standing Order 80. This practice provides sufficient time for the preparation and printing of a complete bill in report form or a clean third reading copy.

However, there have also been instances in the Legislative Assembly where the sponsor of the bill seeks leave for the bill to be read a third time immediately. If leave is granted, it is a unanimous expression of will by the Legislative Assembly to bypass Standing Order 80 in order to proceed to the final consideration of the bill at third reading. Consequently, there have been instances in the Legislative Assembly when a bill is presented to the Lieutenant Governor for Royal Assent on the same day that it was reported from committee with amendment and passed third reading (see B.C. Votes and Proceedings, May 30, 2019, pp. 4-5, 10; B.C. Journals, November 27, 2018, p. 169; November 30, 2017, pp. 84-5; November 17, 2015, pp. 152-3; May 29, 2014, pp. 101, 103-4).

254

10.4.6Third Reading

Third reading is the final stage that a bill must pass through in the Legislative Assembly, and it is a decisive stage in the legislative process. Though permitted under Standing Order 45(1)(e), third reading debate has not been common in the Legislative Assembly, particularly when no substantive amendments have been made to the bill at committee consideration.

Third reading is the final stage that a bill must pass through in the Legislative Assembly, and it is a decisive stage in the legislative process.

Previous editions of Parliamentary Practice in British Columbia emphasize the common practice of limited or no debate in B.C. at third reading of a bill, correctly noting that the Legislative Assembly has, by third reading stage, adopted the principle of the bill at second reading, as well as each clause of the bill at committee stage. However, in some circumstances, such as for a bill addressing an emergency matter or other specific changing circumstances, or if the bill has been amended at committee stage, it is conceivable that a Member could raise new viewpoints on the final form of the bill at third reading which have not been previously canvassed at second reading or committee stage consideration.

255

Comments offered at third reading must not have been previously canvassed at second reading debate or committee consideration of the bill. Debate at third reading is limited to the matters contained in the contents of the bill (see decision of Speaker Plecas, B.C. Votes and Proceedings, April 4, 2019, p. 4).

Debate at third reading is most likely to be held if a bill is reported from committee with amendment. In such instances, third reading debate provides Members with an opportunity to express their views on the amended bill.

The dilatory motions in amendment that may be moved at second reading of a bill may also be moved at third reading debate, outlined in greater detail in section 10.4.3.

10.5Referral of a Bill to a Parliamentary Committee

Generally speaking, a referral is for the purpose of obtaining an opinion or observation, whereas a committal carries with it the power to amend. This point is important when considering the provisions of Standing Orders 78A and 83.

Pursuant to Standing Order 78A, it is in order for the sponsor of a bill to move that the bill be referred to a select standing committee for consideration. Such a motion may be moved without notice and at any stage of consideration of a bill after introduction and first reading, and should be moved after consultation, pursuant to Practice Recommendation 6. The terms of reference for the committee may be outlined in the referral motion. This provision was introduced in the Standing Orders in 1985 but has not been applied or adopted to date.

While permitted under Standing Order 78A, the practice in the Legislative Assembly has been for a public bill to go through the traditional stages of consideration, including the consideration at committee stage in a Committee of the Whole, rather than in a parliamentary committee.

Standing Order 78A should not be confused with a dilatory motion that may be moved at second reading of a bill, outlined in section 10.4.3. In a dilatory motion, any Member may propose that the subject matter of the bill be referred to a parliamentary committee. In a motion permissible under Standing Order 78A, it is only the sponsor of the bill who may propose that the bill itself be referred to a parliamentary committee for consideration and report (see decisions of Deputy Speaker Lovick, B.C. Journals, June 27, 1995, p. 132; see also decision of Speaker Lovick, B.C. Journals, July 8, 1997, pp. 129-30). The terms of reference for the committee would be outlined in the referral motion.

256

When reading Standing Order 83 in conjunction with Standing Order 78A, it must be noted that the subject matter of a bill and the bill itself are two different things. While it may not be in order to refer a bill to a parliamentary committee prior to second reading, the subject matter may be so referred. This motion may be made during debate on second reading, when the reasons for the proposed referral could be explained. The subject matter of a bill may not be referred to a Committee of the Whole (see decision of Deputy Speaker Honey, House of Commons (Canada) Journals, January 20, 1971, p. 270).

Generally speaking, a referral is for the purpose of obtaining an opinion or observation, whereas a committal carries with it the power to amend. Standing Order 78A allows for the sponsor of a bill to move that the bill be referred to a select standing committee for consideration.

Should the Legislative Assembly agree that the subject matter of a bill should be referred to a parliamentary committee for study, the bill itself remains on the Order Paper for second reading, but it will not be proceeded with until the parliamentary committee has considered the matter referred to it and has reported on it to the Assembly.

The subject matter of a bill cannot be referred to a parliamentary committee that has not yet been appointed (see Beauchesne, 6th ed., §675(1), p. 202).

10.6Recommittal of a Bill

The term “recommittal” refers to the act of resending the bill to committee for further examination of specific clauses of the bill. Once reported to the Legislative Assembly from committee, the bill would again proceed to third reading for final adoption. A bill may be recommitted in two ways.

10.6.1Recommittal by Decision of the Legislative Assembly

For a recommittal under Standing Order 86, an amendment to the motion for third reading may be proposed by any Member, discharging the order for third reading and 257 recommitting the bill either to a Committee of the Whole (see B.C. Journals, March 12, 2013, p. 41; House of Commons (Canada) Journals, November 24, 1970, p. 121) or to a select standing committee (see Manitoba Journals, April 18, 1967, pp. 376-7). Such a motion may be moved for one of the following purposes:

1. To enable a new clause to be added.

2. To enable the committee to reconsider amendments it had previously made.

3. To amend a clause or clauses.

As noted in Beauchesne:

A further proceeding is available in the Legislative Assembly, after a bill has been adopted at third reading, permitting the bill to be recommitted. A motion may be moved, for which one day’s notice is required in accordance with Standing Order 81, “That the proceedings in relation to the third reading be declared null and void and the said bill be recommitted” (see B.C. Journals, May 12, 2004, p. 111; May 6, 1997, p. 59; May 28, 1980, p. 119; July 31, 1979, p. 113; June 27, 1978, p. 146; March 3, 1966, p. 99). The purposes of such a recommittal must be consistent with the three purposes listed above.

10.6.2Recommittal by the Lieutenant Governor

Pursuant to the provision of Standing Order 85 and the provincial Constitution Act (s. 48), after a bill has been adopted by the Legislative Assembly at third reading and presented to the Lieutenant Governor for assent thereto, it may be returned by message from the Lieutenant Governor, with any amendments that the Lieutenant Governor may see fit to commit to the Assembly’s consideration.

On a point of order raised in the Legislative Assembly as to the practice in dealing with amendments to bills returned by message recommending amendment, Speaker Keen delivered the following statement (B.C. Journals, April 18, 1918, p. 189):

258

10.7Defeat of a Bill at Second Reading or Third Reading

Prior to 1983 in B.C., it was generally held that a defeat of a motion for second or third reading of a bill was not fatal to the bill, as the Assembly had merely decided that the bill should not receive a second or third reading “now.”

It is currently held that the adoption of a six months’ hoist or a reasoned amendment (outlined in section 10.4.3) or the negativing of the motion for second or third reading of a bill is fatal, as no future day is appointed for consideration of the bill at that stage, and the introduction of a new bill in substantially the same terms is out of order (see Erskine May, 25th ed., §28.45, p. 648).

10.8Withdrawal of a Bill

After a bill’s introduction, it may only be withdrawn from the Legislative Assembly’s consideration if the sponsor of the bill obtains unanimous consent (leave) of the Assembly to do so, pursuant to Standing Order 51(1). This motion can be moved at any stage after introduction; if adopted, the bill no longer appears on the Order Paper.

A bill has also been previously withdrawn from the Order Paper by written notification by the Minister in charge of the bill to the Clerks at the Table (see B.C. Journals, October 21, 2002, p. 160).

A bill of which notice has been given but that has not been introduced may be withdrawn by written request from the Member who provided notice to the Clerks at the Table (see B.C. Votes and Proceedings, October 7, 2019, p. 4).

10.9Royal Assent

After a bill has passed through the required stages of consideration by the Legislative Assembly and has been adopted at third reading, it is one step away from becoming an act. This final step is the Crown’s approval of the bill, called Royal Assent, and is an important feature of British Columbia’s system of governance in a parliamentary democracy under a constitutional monarchy.

259

The Royal Assent ceremony takes place in the Chamber. Once ready to proceed, the Lieutenant Governor will request attendance to the Chamber through the Black Rod. Once the Lieutenant Governor is seated on the Throne, the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly or another Clerk at the Table will read the titles of the bills being presented for assent. Once the titles of the bills have been read, the Lieutenant Governor will simply nod to signify Royal Assent to the noted bills. The Clerk will then announce that the Lieutenant Governor, acting in the name of the Sovereign, has granted Royal Assent to those bills.

The final step in the legislative process is the Crown’s approval of the bill, called Royal Assent, which is provided by the Lieutenant Governor.

If the Lieutenant Governor is unavailable, Royal Assent may be granted by the Administrator, who is appointed by an order of the Governor General in Council, pursuant to the Constitution Act, 1867 (s. 67). The Administrator is the Chief Justice of British Columbia or, if that individual is unavailable, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of British Columbia, the Associate Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of British Columbia, or another member of the judiciary designated by precedence established by federal Order in Council.

Many experts have considered whether Royal Assent may be withheld or reserved, and most suggest that this would not be appropriate in the modern era. Royal Assent was last denied by the Sovereign in the United Kingdom in 1707. In Canada, Royal Assent was last withheld in 1932, and was last reserved in 1961, by Lieutenant Governors of other provinces.

Royal Assent has been withheld or reserved on a handful of occasions in British Columbia, with the last such instance recorded in 1920. The Lieutenant Governor’s power to do so is extended through the Constitution Act, 1867 (s. 90). The provincial Constitution Act also acknowledges that it is within the prerogative of the Lieutenant Governor to reserve Royal Assent and refer a bill to the Governor General of Canada (ss. 5(1)(b) and 5(2)). If Royal Assent is withheld by the Lieutenant Governor, it may be granted by an order of the Governor General in Council, meaning that the Governor General would do so acting on the advice of the federal Cabinet.

10.10Commencement (Coming into Force)

An act does not necessarily carry the force of the law at the moment that it receives Royal Assent. The date of commencement is often provided for in a bill as its final clause. In the absence of such a provision, the act comes into force on the date of Royal Assent, as outlined in the provincial Interpretation Act (s. 3(2)).

260

Without an act being in force, “the obligations it establishes are not mandatory [or binding]; its rights and prohibitions are not enforceable; and its powers are not exercisable” (A Guide to Legislation and Legislative Process in British Columbia (August 2013) — Part 1: The Legislative Process, p. 16).

The above-noted guide further notes:

10.11Accelerated Consideration of a Bill — Urgent and Extraordinary Occasions

Standing Order 81 permits accelerated consideration of a bill in “urgent and extraordinary occasions.” It has been held that only the government may apply to have all stages of a bill considered in one day (see decision of Speaker Barnes, B.C. Journals, April 27, 1996, pp. 9-10). As noted in a decision of Speaker Barisoff: “Standing Order 81 provides an alternative process for considering legislation on an extraordinary occasion and should be used sparingly” (B.C. Journals, January 17, 2009, p. 157).

261

Aside from a few instances of interim supply consideration, the granting of applications under Standing Order 81 for the accelerated consideration of a bill is infrequent in B.C. (see Speakers’ decisions in B.C. Journals, January 17, 2009, pp. 156-7; April 28, 2004, pp. 92-3; March 12, 2003, p. 42; June 19, 2001, p. 6; April 2, 2000, p. 19).

10.11.1Application for Accelerated Consideration

Precedents in the Legislative Assembly indicate that the accelerated consideration of a bill permitted under Standing Order 81 is usually made immediately after the introduction and first reading of the bill. If the motion for the introduction and first reading of the bill is adopted, the sponsor of the bill or the Government House Leader then requests that the Speaker allow the bill to proceed through all stages of consideration in the same day.

In keeping with practice, the Speaker will subsequently declare a short recess to allow the bill to be distributed to all Members. Once the bill has been distributed, the Speaker will typically agree to hear from the recognized caucus House Leaders on the application for accelerated consideration of the bill under Standing Order 81.

10.11.2Determination Made by the Speaker

Once the Speaker has heard any arguments for or against the accelerated consideration of a bill, it falls solely to the Speaker to make a determination under Standing Order 81. Making such a determination may be difficult for the Speaker, given that a variety of complexities may have to be taken into consideration (see decision of Speaker Richmond, B.C. Journals, April 28, 2004, pp. 92-3). For the purposes of making this determination, it has been held that the Speaker may examine the proposed bill to determine whether or not the terms of the bill purport to address the urgency or extraordinary occasion as described by the proponent of the bill who seeks to invoke the provisions of Standing Order 81. In order to do this, Speakers have requested the indulgence of the Legislative Assembly and declared a short recess of the sitting, or have allowed the sitting to continue with another Presiding Officer in the chair, with the Speaker retiring to consider the request.

Successive Speakers making determinations under Standing Order 81 have relied on a finding of Speaker Barnes, where he determined that consideration of the bill could not be fast-tracked for the reason that the bill was too broad in scope. Speaker Barnes noted (B.C. Journals, April 26, 1996, p. 9):

262

Speaker Hartley noted the following when considering an application under Standing Order 81 (B.C. Journals, April 2, 2000, p. 19):

Speaker Richmond reflected on the difficulty that he had in coming to a decision on an application under Standing Order 81 (B.C. Journals, April 28, 2004, pp. 92-3):

263

The process for considering an application under Standing Order 81 was reflected in a decision of Speaker Barisoff, who acknowledged that two tests need to be met — the first requiring the scope of the bill to be limited, and the second being that the bill needs to address an urgent or extraordinary matter. In his decision, Speaker Barisoff laid out the following (B.C. Journals, January 17, 2009, pp. 156-7):

264

10.11.3Result of the Speaker’s Decision

If the Speaker grants the request under Standing Order 81, recognizing the urgent nature of the bill, debate at second reading typically commences immediately after the Speaker delivers the decision. The bill may subsequently proceed through all legislative stages in the same day.

If the Speaker does not grant the request under Standing Order 81, the sponsor of the bill then moves the regular administrative motion that the bill be placed on the Orders of the Day for consideration at the next sitting day.

10.11.4Consideration of Interim Supply in One Sitting

In the Legislative Assembly, consideration of interim supply bills has been completed in one sitting day. This was done on occasions when the degree of urgency justified more than one stage in a day, on the basis that the public service and government creditors could not be paid without the bill’s passage. It was therefore determined that it was an “urgent” or “extraordinary” occasion (see B.C. Journals, March 30, 1995, p. 12; March 26, 1986, p. 31; March 26, 1985, pp. 34-5; September 13, 1984, p. 125).

10.11.5Consideration of Final and Supplementary Supply in One Sitting

As previously noted, the details of expenditure are determined in the Committee of Supply, making the passage of final and supplementary bills an administrative act. Further information is outlined in Chapter 12 (Financial Procedures).

10.12Time Allocation

As an alternative to closure (Standing Order 46, further outlined in Chapter 7 (Rules of Debate)), the Legislative Assembly first adopted Standing Order 81.1 by Sessional Order in 2001. It provides for time allocation on stages of consideration of a bill. Standing Order 81.1 became a permanent provision in 2004 (see B.C. Journals, February 10, 2004, p. 202). Simply put, time allocation allows for specific and limited periods of time to be set aside for the consideration of one or more stages of a public bill. It does not end debate immediately; rather, it sets that a decision on a particular stage or stages of a public bill must conclude within a certain time period.

265

Pursuant to Standing Order 81.1, a Minister can move time allocation to any public bill, though in practice, such motions have only been applied to government bills. Time allocation has most often been proposed by the Government House Leader, but may be moved by any Minister. The intention of Standing Order 81.1 is that it be used in limited circumstances.

At times, the use of time allocation is controversial. As noted in Erskine May:

In the Legislative Assembly, two types of time allocation may be imposed:

1. With agreement of all recognized caucuses (Standing Order 81.1(1)), or

2. Without agreement (Standing Order 81.1(2)).

As an alternative to closure, time allocation allows for specific and limited periods of time to be set aside for the consideration of one or more stages of a public bill.

The interpretation of Standing Order 81.1 has been somewhat flexible in the Legislative Assembly, remaining consistent with the general notion that it can permit the government to fulfill its legislative agenda within a certain time frame. Thus, while Standing Order 81.1 only explicitly applies to bills, it has also been applied to the consideration of estimates in the Committee of Supply (see B.C. Journals, May 31, 2011, pp. 46-7).

266

10.12.1Time Allocation — With Agreement of All Recognized Caucuses

Pursuant to Standing Order 81.1(1), time allocation on the consideration of bills may be imposed by agreement reached between recognized caucuses, typically between the House Leaders. The Government House Leader will then move a motion, of which notice is not required, that reflects the terms of the agreement, if desired. If there is agreement, no motion may be needed. The motion may apply to any stage of consideration of a bill. It must set the date and the time that consideration of the bill in question must conclude, or set the number of hours after which debate on the bill will end. All remaining questions are then put by the Speaker. However, there have been instances when the Government House Leader chose to advise the Legislative Assembly of an agreement reached under Standing Order 81.1(1), rather than move the requisite motion (see B.C. Journals, February 12, 2009, p. 161).

The provision of Standing Order 81.1(1) has not been used frequently (see B.C. Journals, May 6, 2008, p. 100; November 26, 2007, p. 153).

10.12.1.1Government’s Legislative Agenda — Completion by Agreement

On occasion, an agreement on the allocation of time has been reached between the recognized caucuses. Such an agreement does not result in any motion in the Legislative Assembly, and the Assembly may not be informed of it. However, there have been instances when the Government House Leader advises the Legislative Assembly of an agreement to conclude consideration of the government’s legislative priorities or agenda prior to the conclusion of a sitting period (see B.C. Hansard, October 31, 2005, p. 1399):

267

10.12.2Time Allocation — Without Agreement

Pursuant to Standing Order 81.1(2), time allocation on the consideration of bills may be imposed without agreement. In such circumstances, the Government House Leader will move a motion to effect time allocation that may apply to any stage of consideration of a bill. The motion, of which notice is not required, must set the date and the time that consideration of the bill in question must conclude, or set the number of hours after which debate on the bill will end. All remaining questions are then put by the Speaker. If adopted, the timeline for consideration of the bill contained in the motion is imposed.

Time allocation motions moved under Standing Order 81.1(2) typically contain the following provisions (B.C. Journals, May 30, 2007, p. 112):

The provision of Standing Order 81.1(2) has been used sparingly (see B.C. Votes and Proceedings, May 30, 2019, p. 3; May 29, 2019, p. 2; B.C. Journals, November 27, 2018, pp. 166-7; November 6, 2018, pp. 133-4; May 27, 2014, p. 92; May 30, 2012, pp. 147-8; May 31, 2011, pp. 46-7; June 2, 2010, pp. 91-2; April 26, 2010, pp. 51-2; May 6, 2008, pp. 100-1; November 26, 2007, pp. 153-4; May 30, 2007, p. 112).

10.13Administrative Arrangements for Bills

Standing Order 82 provides for the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly to certify all bills as they pass through the required stages of consideration. Failure to certify does not invalidate a bill that has passed all of its stages of consideration, and the Clerk may later rectify this omission. It is the fact that the Journals, as the official record of House proceedings, show that the bill has passed which should govern (see Beauchesne, 6th ed., §756(2), p. 218). Notes taken by the Clerks at the Table constitute the original record of any particular transaction made by the Legislative Assembly and may be consulted in cases of omission in the Votes and Proceedings, Journals or the certification process.

268

Furthermore, the provincial Constitution Act mandates the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly to endorse the date that every act is assented to by the Lieutenant Governor (s. 5(1)). The provincial Constitution Act also charges the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly to keep custody of all original acts adopted by the Legislative Assembly (s. 6).

10.14Effect of Prorogation and Dissolution

Prorogation of a Session of a Parliament brings to an end all proceedings before the Legislative Assembly. As such, bills that have not received Royal Assent before prorogation “die on the Order Paper” and must be reintroduced in the new Session.

Similarly, bills, along with all business in the Legislative Assembly, end upon dissolution. Dissolution terminates a Parliament and is followed by a provincial general election.

10.15Statute Revision

The traditional term for an act that becomes law is “statute.” Statutes are amended every year, with new provisions being added and existing provisions being repealed or replaced. Some acts are frequently amended to reflect changing circumstances or policy, while others are seldom amended. In either case, an act that had a logical organization when it first became law can lose that structure with each amendment, making it difficult for readers to find and understand the information they need.

The Statute Revision Act (R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 440) provides a solution to this problem by authorizing the Chief Legislative Counsel to consolidate, renumber and reorganize amended acts into more coherent and readable “revised” acts. The Statute Revision Act establishes a continuing statute revision authority and outlines the types of modifications that the Chief Legislative Counsel may prepare in a revised statute (s. 2). No substantive changes to a law may be made by statute revision.

Prior to 1992 when the Statute Revision Act was enacted, each revision was separately authorized by an act that would establish the position of Revision Commissioner and authorize this official to prepare a revision that would be presented to the Legislative Assembly. The new process established in 1992 was unique to British Columbia at the time, but has since been adopted by other Canadian jurisdictions.

The Office of Legislative Counsel within the Government of British Columbia prepares a revision to an act in consultation with the ministry responsible for the act. When completed, the revision is submitted to the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly. The review of the proposed revision is delegated by the Legislative Assembly to a designated select standing committee of the Assembly. Recent practice has been to present the proposed revisions to the Select Standing Committee on Parliamentary Reform, Ethical Conduct, Standing Orders and Private Bills for examination.

If the committee to which the proposed statute revisions have been presented agrees with the revisions, the committee will recommend to the Lieutenant Governor that the 269 revisions be brought into force. A report reflecting the decision of the committee is also presented to the Legislative Assembly. In effect, this recommendation is equivalent to third reading of a bill, as the revision does not become an act until the Lieutenant Governor gives direction that a copy of the revised statute be deposited with the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly as the official copy of the revision. The official copy is signed by the Lieutenant Governor and countersigned by the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly.

The Lieutenant Governor in Council may specify by regulation when such a revision comes into force. When the revised statute comes into force, it is assigned a chapter, as if it were enacted by the Legislature. The Statute Revision Act (s. 7) provides that provisions of the previous act that are replaced by the revision are repealed when the revision comes into force.

10.16Executive Legislation

Acts enacted by the Legislature often include provisions delegating certain powers to the executive branch of government, including designated government entities. “Some acts of Parliament delegate to ministers, departments, agencies, boards or other authorities the power to make and apply subordinate legislation described only in general terms in the acts” (House of Commons Procedure and Practice, 3rd ed., p. 807).

As noted in Erskine May:

An act may provide the general framework, with executive legislation filling out the details. The act, or “enabling legislation,” must include the regulation-making authority — that is, the extent and scope of executive legislation permitted by the Legislature to be made by the executive branch of government. Executive legislation is, therefore, a form of law made by the executive branch of government. Although it is often referred to as “subordinate,” “delegated” or “subsidiary” legislation, executive legislation is a subset of these forms of law. It is also commonly referred to as “regulations.”

Executive legislation is generally subject to review, indexing, archiving, and publication under the Regulations Act (R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 402).