With great respect, I have considered the matter. My recollection is that the original motion said that the government should establish something and the amendment said that it should continue the implementation of something. That is a change from the original motion. It is a change which in the Chair's view is in order because any member is entitled to move an amendment that changes what is alleged to be a statement of fact in the first motion and turn it into something else. It did that.
The subamendment sought to move that back in effect to the original position. That is what is out of order. That is what I am ruling out of order. I think we should move on.
There may be questions or comments on the speech of the hon. member for Selkirk—Interlake.