When it comes to federal jurisdiction, this is a criterion that is particularly relevant when dealing with bills. Indeed, motions do not establish prescriptive criteria. It only means that the House of Commons gives its opinion on the subject. This calls on the House's right to debate any matter and express its opinion on it. There are other motions on the list that we could study today, and some aspects of them could fall under provincial jurisdiction.
However, in the case of a policy statement, given that the House is simply being asked to give its opinion on a subject of public interest, it is difficult to establish if it falls under federal jurisdiction. This criterion is not really appropriate for motions. It is specifically intended for bills. However, it goes without saying that if a motion clearly interferes with a province's affairs, one could argue that that is under provincial jurisdiction, therefore contrary to the criteria. Nonetheless, since in this case the House is simply being asked to condemn a certain practice, I find it very difficult to say that that does not fall under federal jurisdiction.