The purpose of a committee of the whole is to relax the usual limits on debate, allowing a more open exchange of views without the urgency of a final vote.
After debating, the committee submits its conclusions to the assembly (that is, to itself) and business continues according to the normal rules.
Outside the Commonwealth (for example, in continental European parliaments), the practice of committees of the whole does not exist - meetings of the entire membership are held according to the plenary sitting's rules, and the section-by-section vote on bills occurs in the plenum of the chamber.
[1] In the Australian Senate, the committee of the whole remains in use for consideration of bills and is provided for by chapter 21 of the standing orders.
[4] On June 11, 2008, Prime Minister Stephen Harper formally apologized in the House of Commons for the government's historical role in the Canadian residential school system.
A Committee of the Whole was used, so that aboriginal leaders (who were not Members of Parliament) could be allowed to respond to the apology on the floor of the House.
[5] At the provincial and territorial level, committees of the whole continue to be frequently used by jurisdictions with smaller legislative assemblies.
The Committee originated as means to consider legislation without the presence of royal officers and without a formal record being made of the proceedings.
Either option opens debate in the manner of the committee of the whole, but the presiding officer retains the chair.