Before we resume debate, I am now prepared to rule on a point of order raised by the hon. Leader of the Government in the House of Commons concerning the amendment to the motion for second reading of Bill S-23, an act to amend the Customs Act and to make related amendments to other acts, which is presently before the House.
The amendment, moved by the hon. member for Edmonton--Strathcona, is in the form of a reasoned amendment. A reasoned amendment, according to House of Commons Procedure and Practice , page 638, is one which “--allows a member to state the reasons why he or she opposes second reading of a bill--”.
Concerning such an amendment, Marleau and Montpetit states further, at page 639, “It must be relevant and relate strictly to the bill being considered”.
According to the summary of the bill, Bill S-23 seeks in part to amend the Customs Act by “--providing for the expedited movement of persons and goods into Canada--”.
The hon. member for Edmonton--Strathcona objects to the second reading of the bill because, and I quote, “...the principle of the bill fails to specifically and adequately address national security at Canada's borders with respect to terrorist activities”.
Marleau and Montpetit also states at page 639:
A reasoned amendment may be declaratory of a principle adverse to or differing from the principles, policy or provisions of the bill...
The Chair has examined the amendment very carefully in the context of the purposes of the bill. I am satisfied that it does not contravene any of our rules or the usual practice of the House with respect to reasoned amendments. The amendment is in order.