The principle and first clause of the bill are very clear. They completely prohibit the export of horses for slaughter.
Unfortunately, based on the advice of the procedural clerks, I think the amendment exceeds the principle of the bill.
That's the advice.
I was asking similar questions. As the chair of the committee, yesterday I asked about a number of different ways, but I have to be guided in part. No matter how sympathetic I might be to the amendment that's being moved, I have an obligation to follow the procedural elements of this House and follow parliamentary procedure.
The advice I'm getting is quite clear. There are other times when I've had a bit more discretion—when it's been a little less black and white—but unfortunately, this is the one that I'm being told would be precedent-setting.
I am willing to be challenged based on the advice I'm given, but I don't know if the vote will be any different.
What would you like to do next, Monsieur Perron?