The Chair wishes to thank the hon. member for West Nova for raising this issue before the House. I know it is an interesting point but one that has been dealt with before.
I would refer the hon. member to the decision of the Speaker of this House made on November 19, 1996, in respect of a similar argument advanced by the hon. member for St. Albert on a bill then under consideration.
In that decision by the Speaker he indicated that there were two amendments by the Senate for which concurrence of the House was being sought. The member for St. Albert had asked the Speaker at that time to rule on the procedural acceptability of changes made by the Senate. The Speaker stated, and I quote from page 6411 of Hansard :
My view is that your Speaker cannot stand as a procedural judge on what is done by the Senate. What they do over there, they do over there.
In his ruling the Speaker cited with great reverence the decision of Mr. Speaker Fraser made on April 26, 1990, which is published in the book whose publication we are celebrating today. I refer the hon. member to the decision of Mr. Speaker Fraser which was made on an argument advanced on a bill to amend the Unemployment Insurance Act brought forward in 1990.
I can tell the hon. member that the hon. member for Glengarry—Prescott—Russell and I argued something along the lines he is arguing today, but with the additional argument about financial measures. I can also tell the hon. member that at that time we lost our argument as he is going to lose his today.
This argument in my view is not well founded. I quote from Mr. Speaker Fraser's ruling on page 10723 of Hansard , April 26, 1990, where he said:
—the Speaker of the House of Commons cannot unilaterally rule out of order amendments from the other place. I can comment, as I am doing, but the House as a whole must ultimately make the decision to accept or reject amendments from the Senate, whether they be in order according to our rules or not.
As Mr. Speaker Parent said, it comes down to a decision of the House.
I am afraid the hon. member may, by his arguments later, advance arguments as to why the House should reject the amendments made by the Senate, but in my view it is not the place of the Speaker or presiding officer of the House to rule these amendments out of order, at least on the grounds advanced by the hon. member for West Nova.