What I can say, Mr. Chair, is only from a procedural point of view. From a substantive point of view, you'd have to speak to the analysts. I know that Raphaëlle has her hand up.
Ultimately what I would say from a procedural point of view is that if the chair has ruled the motion in order, then the chair has ruled that the motion is in order and it's before the committee. The committee can then consider it, as it would any other motion the chair has ruled in order, and then can amend it, vote on it and decide it.
With regard to whether the content is actually within the mandate of the committee, I'm probably the wrong person to ask. I would refer this to Raphaëlle, who will be able to answer that.
Thank you.