I am now prepared to rule on a point of order raised on Friday, March 24, 2000 by the hon. member for Prince George—Peace River, the whip of the official opposition, concerning the status of private member's Bill C-206.
I would like to thank the hon. member for drawing this issue to the Chair's attention, as well as the hon. member for Wentworth—Burlington for his careful outline of events on March 27. I also thank the parliamentary secretary to the government House leader for his contribution to the discussion.
The point in question arises from an earlier ruling delivered by the Chair on March 21 in which the list of 100 signatures filed in support of Bill C-206 pursuant to Standing Order 87(6) was declared invalid.
The hon. member for Wentworth—Burlington was informed that it would be necessary to submit a new list of signatures if the bill is to be proceeded with under the provisions of that standing order. The hon. member for Prince George—Peace River protested the fact that rather than submit the list of 100 signatures, Bill C-206 had instead been part of an exchange of items of private members' business. He argued that the item was therefore not legitimately on the order of precedence and was preventing other members from proceeding with their items under that provision of the standing orders.
The hon. member for Wentworth—Burlington indicated to the House that the exchange had been necessary for reasons of ill health and that the Speaker's earlier ruling had not precluded an exchange of items if such was necessary.
I have carefully reviewed all of the elements of this case, including the original issue raised with respect to Bill C-206, the proceedings in the procedure and House affairs committee that dealt with it and the 19th report of the committee tabled in the House on March 17.
The issue here, as I see it, is one of fairness both to the hon. member for Wentworth—Burlington and to other members who are prepared to advance items of private members' business for which they have gathered lists of at least 100 signatures.
While my earlier ruling on Bill C-206 did not preclude any exchanges, I wish to make it clear that it is an item in abeyance in the order of precedence. At the same time, I feel now, as I did then, that given the special circumstances of this case, the hon. member should be given a reasonable opportunity to file a new list.
This is one of those decisions where one tries to be fair to all sides. Consequently, what I am prepared to allow the hon. member for Wentworth—Burlington to do is to have a further five sitting days beginning tomorrow, March 30, in which to file a new list of signatures. In the meantime, his item will return to and remain at the bottom of the list. If after those five sitting days no list has been filed pursuant to Standing Order 87(6), I will order the bill to be dropped from the order of precedence and placed on the list of items outside the order. It will in that case remain eligible for selection in the next draw.
I thank all hon. members for their assistance in this matter.
