Let us suppose that a motion is introduced at the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, that it is adopted by a unanimous or majority vote, and that we then report to the House to amend the Standing Orders in order to define the principles of prorogation. You seem to say that this would be progress and that it would become a constitutional convention. You go even further by saying that Mr. Layton's motion is the starting point for amending the constitutional convention.
If the Standing Orders of the House are amended to include the prorogation procedures, would the Prime Minister have no other choice but to comply with the Standing Orders of the House or he would be found in contempt of Parliament?