I'm going to bring the meeting back to order. I remind members that we are still in public, having adjourned for twenty minutes. That time is now up.
Ladies and gentlemen, I have had an opportunity to consult with the clerks, who have consulted with other folks. On Monsieur Guimond's recommendation, we have reviewed page 453 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice. May I read it to you? It says, “An amendment must be relevant to the main motion. It must not stray from the main motion but aim to further refine its meaning and intent. ... An amendment is out of order procedurally, if...”, and it lists a number of events.
In particular, what caught my attention is point number four—and yours, Monsieur Guimond, and I appreciate the fact that you have pointed this out:
An amendment is out of order procedurally, if...it is the direct negative of the main motion and would produce the same result as the defeat of the motion.
Having read the original motion and the amendment, I therefore rule that the amendment is not in order, as it does result in a direct negative of the main motion.
I must remind the committee that Mr. Lukiwski still has the floor, but I will speak to my ruling at this point.
Mr. Hill, please.