I know, and I appreciate the clarification, Chair. There was perhaps a misunderstanding at the beginning when you suggested that there was a consequential amendment. Perhaps we could take a second so I can go back and take a look at it.
I'm not disagreeing with you, Chair. I would not dare to do that. I understand the circumstances of what you're saying. I just want to go back to my friend across the way and his first amendment. I recognize that the initial motion by the parliamentary secretary also included a sunset provision.
It may well have been me not quite understanding what the direction was. I certainly am prepared to accept your ruling, as long as we're all clear around the issue of us actually now voting on the entire clause as amended. Or is it the amendment to the clause?