Thank you, Mr. Garneau.
The legislative clerk has just informed me that in his view—and it's mine as well—this amendment is out of order because, according to Marleau-Montpetit on page 656,
An amendment is also out of order if it is moved at the wrong place in the bill, if it is tendered in a spirit of mockery, or if it is vague or trifling. As well, an amendment is out of order if it refers to...subsequent amendments or schedules of which notice has not been given, or if it is otherwise incomplete.
Because this amendment refers to an earlier clause that has been adopted by the committee, clause 10, and because it modifies that earlier adopted clause, it is out of order.
Now, if there is unanimous consent on the part of the committee to reopen clause 10, we can proceed with this amendment. But if there isn't unanimous consent in this committee to reopen clause 10, which has already been adopted, then I cannot allow this amendment to stand.
Mr. Garneau, do you have any questions about that?