On a point of order, this is absolutely farcical. You could spend two hours just on what has been violated in parliamentary procedure today. It's absolutely disgusting.
In terms of parliamentary procedure, and Marleau and Montpetit is very clear, an amendment that is moved gives the opportunity for a member to state the reasons why he or she believes a clause should be amended. There is no provision in the rules of order—absolutely no provision—unless there is unanimous consent to proceed in this manner. There are absolutely no precedents, and there is nothing in Marleau and Montpetit that allows debate to be completely ended in the way you are doing, Mr. Chair.
That is my point of order, and I would expect a ruling from the clerk that this charade will end.