Well, he can't move a motion on a point of order, so....
Order.
The advice from the clerks is based, in fact, on what was I believe read by Mr. McCallum—Standing Order 119, on page 90 of the Standing Orders:
Any Member of the House who is not a member of a standing, special or legislative committee, may, unless the House or the committee concerned otherwise orders, take part in the public proceedings of the committee, but may not vote or move any motion, nor be part of any quorum.
This is why the practice we have used in the finance committee—in fact, that we had in the last Parliament, in which the Liberal Party had an extra member, Ms. Martha Hall Findlay—is that I would ask, “Do we have the consent of the committee for Ms. Findlay to ask questions?” Consent was generally given.
Consent was not given here. It says “unless the House or the committee concerned otherwise orders”. This is the advice the clerks are giving me; this is the statement that I'm reading here today.
There's actually an easy way to address this, which is to have a substitution sheet passed to the clerk who is sitting next to me, and this would be addressed in about five seconds, or we can continue with the gamesmanship that's being played here.
But you're testing the chair's patience. Frankly, we're following the words in the Standing Orders, following the advice of the clerks. I can have the clerks amplify this ruling for the Liberal Party so that they fully understand it, or we can move on to clause 8, which is what I will do as the chair.
I'm moving on to clause 8.
I've given my ruling. It's not a point of order.
Mr. Lamoureux, you're not recognized by the chair.
Is there any discussion on clause 8?
Mr. Lamoureux, the committee has clearly indicated that unless you're subbed in, they do not wish to hear from you.