Okay, amendment NDP-2 is withdrawn.
There are no amendments proposed on clauses 14 to 18.
(Clauses 14 to 18 inclusive agreed to on division)
(On clause 19)
For amendment PV-1, the mover isn't here, but it is inadmissible in any event because it requires a royal recommendation, as I understand the English. I should perhaps read into the record why.
Bill C-74 introduces the Canada workers benefit. The amendment attempts to amend the definition of “adjusted net income” to remove some income that would otherwise be included in the adjusted net income. As a result, the income would be lower and therefore allow an individual to obtain more benefits.
As House of Commons Procedure and Practice, third edition, states on page 772:
Since an amendment may not infringe upon the financial initiative of the Crown, it is inadmissible if it imposes a charge on the public treasury, or if it extends the objects or purposes or relaxes the conditions and qualifications specified in the royal recommendation.
Ms. May, this is in relation to your amendment PV-1. In the opinion of the chair, the amendment could impose a higher charge on the public treasury than the one envisioned in the bill. Therefore, I rule the amendment inadmissible.
With that ruling, shall clause 19—