I cannot judge what you said. All I can tell you is that our book of procedure allows for challenging the chair’s decision on an amendment’s admissibility, and that process is now in motion. I am not telling you whether I like or dislike it. I’m telling you that the process is now in motion. We now have to vote on my decision regarding the amendment’s admissibility.
At the same time, I want to point out to members of the committee that, when contesting the admissibility of an amendment from the jump, before even debating it, we are starting down a slippery slope. I’m not saying it’s antidemocratic, but it’s close. That is just my opinion as chair. We can propose amendments, debate them and see where that leads us, but I find it somewhat dangerous to challenge the admissibility of an amendment before we’ve even debated it.
That said, a vote was requested.
Is the chair’s ruling sustained?