I will just remind members of the rule that governs an amendment that may be outside the scope of the bill. I'll use that term generally.
It's clear that an amendment that attempts to amend a section of the parent act, i.e., the Criminal Code, that is not already included in the bill would be out of order. I think the witness here, the government, has indicated that there is a connection, not because the non-included section was included in the bill, but because of the procedure involved. There's an analogous procedure amended in one section but not amended in the other section.