Mr. Chairman, I gave you that document. Earlier, you read your legislative drafter's decision. You read it, you did not give me a copy of it in both languages, and I did not ask you for one. I read the document out to you. I brought copies of it so that people can read it. I can read out to you the document that I received from the legislative drafter who drafted my amendment and who had asked for the legislative clerk's opinion. Let me read it out to you for clarification.
I do not agree with the position that you propose. I expressly asked the drafter who drafted my amendment to verify if it had been tabled, because that would change my working schedule. I want you to understand that. If I am not working on this amendment, I am tabling something else regarding the terms "minimum", "reasonable", etc.
Someone has misled me. Was it the legislative drafter who drafted my amendment? I asked for an opinion, because I wanted my amendment to be in order; otherwise, I would never have tabled it.
Now you are telling me that it is out of order. You did not give me three days notice, you are telling me that today. Since November, I was assured that this amendment was in order. This is why, last time, I questioned Mr. McGuinty regarding an amendment. I know that I had asked for opinions to find out whether my amendments were in order. Now you are telling me that they are not in order. This is why I have doubts, not about your decision, but about the clerk's advice. This is not your decision. This is advice from your clerk. Nevertheless, the legislative drafter who drafted my amendment checked with the clerk.
It does not matter what happens to my amendment afterward. It can be defeated, anything can happen to it. However, as an elected representative, I feel that I have been cheated by the government apparatus. I do not feel cheated by you or by the committee and I do not want to create obstructions. I simply said that I wanted to adopt the bill today. That is my concern.
I have a list of amendments to propose, and proposals will no doubt be made if we add the term "vibrations". If your legislative drafter decides that it is out of order, then I have made no progress, Mr. Jean. If we can all agree about adding the term "vibrations" and if the clerk says that it is not in order, it comes down to challenging the clerk's decision.
I would like us to go ahead and add a few things. However, I am not sure whether your clerk gave you good advice. I have a problem with it. You should also have a problem with the fact that your clerk has given such advice.
I will probably agree with Mr. Jean about some amendments, but what will happen if they are not in order, Mr. Jean?