Thank you, Mr. Manly.
It's the same issue as in the previous amendment, PV-2. It's an amendment to a bill that was referred to committee after second reading. It would be out of order if it is beyond the scope and principle of the bill, and I would rule that the amendment is again inadmissible.
The next one is amendment PV-4.
Mr. Manly, again, if you want to speak briefly.... It's the same issue as previously. It will be ruled inadmissible, as it is an amendment to the bill that was referred to the committee after second reading. It's out of order because it's beyond the scope and principle of the bill, but if you want to speak to it briefly, please go ahead.