All right.
There is no debate, as Mr. Holland has already suggested, on the challenge that has been brought forward--by the table, I guess, by the legal...by the clerk.
Let me just read to you what they have said, and then we will take a vote on it:
Bill S-2 amends the Criminal Code to require that a court shall make an order in Form 52 with regard to a person sentenced to a "designated offence", or a person found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder, requiring the person to comply with the Sex Offender Information Registration Act for an applicable period. This amendment proposes to allow the court to exercise discretion and to not make that order if it is satisfied that certain conditions have been met. As House of Commons Procedure and Practice (2nd Edition) states on page 766: "An amendment to a bill that was referred to committee after second reading is out of order if it is beyond the scope and principle of the bill." In the opinion of the Chair, the introduction of the concept of discretion is contrary to the principle of Bill S-2 and is therefore inadmissible.
So shall the chair's ruling be sustained?
(Ruling of the chair overturned)