Mr. Chairman, to try to help the chair, I had originally proposed a definition, as I mentioned in L-3. I would view Mr. Menzies' subamendment to my amendment as a friendly subamendment.
If we weren't into the procedural games we're in, we would probably accept that without debate. Since we want to debate absolutely everything we can, this may not be possible, although it would be desirable.
Mr. Chairman, from my perspective, I would have no problem accepting Mr. Menzies' suggestions. The amendments that follow are consequential to my amendment and his subamendment. In my view, I would respectfully say they're in order.
If you judge, Mr. Chairman, they're not, Mr. Julian's motion to table to a future meeting is certainly out of order, because as we will remember in the original motion, there will be no future meetings until we dispose of this bill. We will dispose of this bill at this meeting.