Chair, to the very point of the question of substitution, I'm dealing with an amendment, whether or not you and Mr. Crête have understood this to be correct or incorrect with respect to the Standing Orders. If I am to look at both the amendment that I provided, as well as Mr. Holland's original motion, they deal substantively with the same issue, an issue concerning the takeover; they deal with Investment Canada; they deal with a series of companies; and they are in fact very much in keeping with the same notion.
The real question that you have attempted to address here is whether or not the amendment itself is in fact receivable, given the way in which it was first presented by Mr. Holland. My view is that that is not negotiable, and that the amendment has to be heard here now.