Well, I appreciate that, Mr. Vellacott.
Again, the clerk advises that it has been split, that the decision has been made, and we will now vote on it.
Shall I read this so that it's clear? It reads:
When a complicated motion comes before the House (for example, a motion containing two or more parts each capable of standing on its own)
—which this is—
the Speaker has the authority to modify it and thereby facilitate decision-making for the House. When any Member objects to a motion that contains two or more distinct propositions, he or she may request that the motion be divided and that each proposition be debated and voted on separately. The final decision, however, rests with the Chair. On a related matter, the Speaker has ruled that the practice of dividing substantive motions has never been extended to bills and that the Chair has no authority to do so.
Basically it says that I make the decision as to whether it's split or not—and I make the decision it is split. So now we will deal with each of the two sides, as I understand it, and then we'll have a vote on each in that sequence. We would vote on the first part of it and then we would vote on the second part. I don't think we need to debate this, as that decision has been made.
Do you have a point of order or...?