Every amendment is in order unless there is a procedural reason to suggest that it is not in order. We do see amendments to coming into force provisions of bills. These, in most cases, we don't see as harming the principle of the bill, as going outside the scope of the bill, as implying expenditures that might require a royal recommendation. The amendment appears to be complete, coherent. I don't see any procedural reason to suggest that the amendment is not admissible.
On October 23rd, 2006. See this statement in context.