I tried to get this on, and then we were debating your ruling last time, Mr. Chair, so I just want to get it on the record. I think your ruling in fact would be proper if the fourth “whereas” didn't use the term “commit serious or repeat offences” but said “commit serious and repeat offences”. I think there's a broad enough opening that makes these amendments admissible because of that. I know that's nitpicking, but I think that's the reality of the way the bill has been drafted. That's why I'm supporting the motion to challenge your ruling, only because of that.
