Mr. Chair, it's not out of order by much. Members know that when giving a notice to the Journals Branch, for instance, preambles aren't generally accepted. I examined the motion as written and determined that the debatable part would be the final sentence of each substantive motion. In the EnerGuide motion, it would be: “that the committee, in the interest of sound public policy”. That would be the motion. In the other one it would be: “that the committee call upon the government and the Minister of Natural Resources to immediately reinstate the full funding of the EnerGuide program.” Those would be the motions.
If the committee's intention would be to report these motions, if adopted, back to the House, then I would suggest that the initial part preceding the motion part be set off from the bottom motion and included as part of a report. As a stand-alone motion, I don't think it can stand, because of Beauchesne's and the precedents that have been accepted.