Mr. Chair, this motion is out of order for another reason that was not dealt with in the substance of your remarks, and this is why I draw it to the attention of the committee.
You gave a rationale for the reason it's out of order, which of course is appropriate. For a chair to rule something out of order without giving a reason would be inappropriate.
At the beginning of this meeting, when Mr. Lukiwski was busy making his motion, I initially thought I had misheard it. The point I thought I misheard was about the next meeting. “At the next meeting”, the committee is to engage in the study he has proposed.
It is nonsensical to start doing that at the next meeting. If that occurs as Madam Jennings proposes, that we only consider discussing the subject matter after we've held numerous meetings on a different subject, it's simply nonsensical. She could have worded it differently, and of course she has an opportunity to do so at a future moment. She might wish to do so immediately, or one of her colleagues might wish to do so, but this is a nonsensical motion. It is not possible to have multiple meetings, table a report, but “at the next meeting” deal with the subject matter here.