For the rest of the committee, we'll deal with some business right now.
Everybody, I believe, has a copy of Mr. Rota's motion in both official languages. I'll just go ahead with the ruling, Mr. Rota, because I think you'll see why, based on your motion.
As the members are well aware, a committee has an order of reference from the House with regard to Bill C-568, a private member's bill. In the case of private member's bills, the committee has three options available to fulfill its mandate.
Option number one is that the committee may simply ignore the order of reference, and the bill will automatically be deemed reported back to the House without amendment after the prescribed period of sitting days has elapsed. That period is 60 days, with the possibility of a further 30 days if we ask for an extension.
Option number two is that the committee may adopt a motion to not proceed further with the bill. This option sets in motion the elements of Standing Order 97.1(2), a motion to concur, and the report is automatically placed on a notice, debated, and subsequently voted on. If the concurrence motion not to proceed carries, the bill is defeated; if the motion fails, the bill is deemed reported without amendment.
Then we have a third option: the committee may proceed to clause-by-clause consideration of the bill. In this case the committee considers the bill clause by clause, and if necessary word by word, and approves the text or modifies it. Once all of the clauses have been approved, modified, or deleted, the bill in its entirety is submitted for the approval of the committee. After the bill is adopted, the chair asks the committee for leave to report the bill to the House.
The motion of Mr. Rota seeks to empower the committee to skip clause-by-clause consideration of the bill and instruct the chair of the committee to immediately report the bill back to the House without amendment. As House of Commons Procedure and Practice, second edition, states on page 762, “Each clause of the bill is a distinct question requiring separate consideration.”
In order to properly consider the bill, it will be necessary for the chair to formally put the question on each clause, any possible amendments or subamendments, the title, the bill itself, and the motion seeking leave to report the bill.
Since the motion of Mr. Rota seeks to combine all of these distinct questions into one general motion, it deprives the members of the opportunity to propose amendments and voice their opinions on the separate elements being considered. For these reasons I must rule that the motion is out of order.
You of course have that option, Mr. Rota.
