Points of Order — Royal Succession Bill—Procedure

I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I came at the earliest possible convenience, but I would like to ask for your considered ruling, in the time available before the conclusion of this debate, as to whether the Royal Succession Bill, the next bill on the Order Paper, can properly be debated today. The reason I ask this is that this legislation is subject to judicial challenge through the courts. As you know, in this House we are guarded by the principle of comity, the mutual respect of Parliament and the courts for each other’s jurisdictions. We work in ways to maintain this respect, and I am concerned that we may be about to breach these.

What is unusual about the Royal Succession Bill is that changes are required in 16 nations where the Queen is head of State. Papers were filed several weeks ago—and I am happy to provide you with a copy now—in the Superior Court of Quebec by Professors Motard and Taillon. They are two of Canada’s pre-eminent constitutional experts. The motion for declaratory judgment is set down for hearing on 18 July. Normally, I would not think that proceedings half a world away would give the House reason to pause, but given the unique nature of this bill and the need for concurrent changes in multiple legislatures, I suspect that it would be best for this House to wait until the Quebec proceedings are resolved. For that reason, I ask for your considered ruling.

This House is not subject to the courts of Quebec, in whatever form they might be. This House has full jurisdiction to hear the Royal Succession Bill and to deliberate accordingly. The member should know that. He is supposed to be a member of this Parliament. He should know that we are not subject to the laws of Quebec.

All right, well, thinking about that, I would have to take advice on that because it is another jurisdiction. I take on board what the Minister has said and I am inclined to agree with the Minister, but I will seek some advice and I will come back.