Thank you, Mr. Kmiec, for raising the point of order.
I'm reading from chapter 12 about subamendments.
Most of what applies to amendments applies equally to subamendments. Each subamendment must be strictly relevant to, and not at variance with the sense of, the corresponding amendment and must seek to modify the amendment and not the original question. A subamendment cannot enlarge upon the amendment, introduce new matters foreign to it or differ in substance from it. A subamendment cannot strike out all of the words in an amendment, thereby nullifying it; the Speaker has ruled that the proper course in such a case would be for the House to defeat the amendment. Debate on a subamendment is restricted to the words added to or omitted from the original motion by amendment. Since subamendments cannot be further amended, a Member wishing to change one under debate must wait until it is defeated and then propose a new subamendment.
According to this, my interpretation is that this is out of order, and we have to deal with Mr. Chiang's amendment first. Then, if MP Kwan wants to bring it forward, she has the right.
I'll give the floor to MP Kwan.