That brings us to CPC-37.
The amendment seeks to make a substantive modification in the preamble by deleting the words “and carried out in accordance with the recommendations of the Advisory Council on the Implementation of National Pharmacare;”. House of Commons Procedure and Practice, third edition, states on page 774, “In the case of a bill that has been referred to committee after second reading, a substantive amendment to the preamble is admissible only if it is rendered necessary by amendments made to the bill.”
In the opinion of the chair, the proposed amendment is substantive, and since no amendment has been adopted to warrant this deletion, I declare the amendment inadmissible.
That brings us to CPC-38.
In connection with CPC-38, I have the exact same comments and the exact same conclusion, so I will spare you the reading of the details and simply indicate to you that I find that since the proposed amendment is substantive and no amendment has been adopted to warrant the decision, I declare the amendment inadmissible.
That brings us, then, to CPC-39.
My ruling on CPC-39 is identical to that on CPC-37 and CPC-38. For the reasons previously stated in connection with CPC-37 and CPC-38, I declare this amendment inadmissible.
That brings us to CPC-40.
It is the same ruling, the same logic and the same conclusion. I declare CPC-40 inadmissible.
That brings us to the preamble.
Shall the preamble carry?