I don't agree with that amendment to the routine motions, because we'll need time prior to the clause-by-clause to consider amendments. I understand in the course of clause-by-clause that sometimes a subamendment will come forward, but what I understand Mr. Ménard to be saying is that he wants to be able to introduce, with less than 48 hours' notice, a substantial amendment. If there's a substantial amendment to move, you should be able to move it with the 48 hours' notice. I don't see why he'd want to move one right before clause-by-clause.
On March 29th, 2007. See this statement in context.