Thank you, Madam Chair.
I just wanted to weigh in, in support of what Mr. Garrison said.
Look, this is as if I put forward a motion on anti-Semitism and I referred to Jews, then somebody pulled the word “Jews” out of the motion so that it was no longer about Jews and the flagrant anti-Semitism we're now facing, but a general portrayal of everything. I do agree that the motion by itself may be perfectly fine, but it's not the motion Mr. Garrison intended. It's a wholesale amendment to the core subject of the motion.
I think it is unreceivable, Madam Chair. First of all, in order for it to be receivable, there would have to be an actual amendment here. This isn't an actual amendment. It's an entirely new motion. You would have to say, “We propose to strike all the words after the word ‘to’ and substitute a, b and c by the following”. That would be the way an amendment is drafted.
This isn't even drafted as an amendment. It's just drafted as a new motion.