Procedure in the Canadian House of Commons is an attempt to survey the whole field of Canadian procedure historically and analytically, to establish what the procedure of the House was in 1867 and to trace its slow development—its evolvement through principles, traditions, rulings, and precedents—to the present time. A particular interest has been taken in depicting how the House operates in practice as compared with how it is believed to operate in theory. Throughout his analysis, Dawson provides insightful criticism and proposals for improvement in the hopes that this book will provide a new perspective on procedure both to those who are caught up in the day-to-day functioning of the House and to those, both in the House and outside it, who are concerned about larger, more distant implications.

W.F. Dawson (1930-2011), the son of R. MacGregor Dawson, was a professor emeritus of political science at the University of Western Ontario.

William Dawson's profile page

"It outlines in clear, precise and readable language the manner in which the House conducts it business. It shows how the rules of procedure and debate derived originally from Parliament at Westminster have been changed or modified by Canada. But more valuable still are his analyses, his criticisms, and his proposals for improvement. His book should be required reading for members of the House of Commons and for all who are interested in the welfare of Canadian democracy and of our Parliamentary institutions. For such it will fill a long-felt need."

Canadian Forum

"For everyone interested in the working of parliamentary government in Canada, this is an important book. It provides, as far as I can judge, an excellent summary of the history of procedure in our House of Commons; and almost all its suggestions for reforms seem to me eminently sensible."

Ottawa Journal

"Under the guise of exploring the development of the basic procedures used in the House of Commons, Professor Dawson has written an interesting and often lively volume. . . . Taking the rules as a starting point, the author has produced an illuminating commentary on the anatomy of the House, with occasional excursions into its pathology."

University of Toronto Law Journal