Mr. Speaker, I know that Bill C-259 will be before the House tomorrow. It is the projected order. There was a report submitted by the finance committee, an amended report submitted by the finance committee, and it is s our respectful position that the bill, as reported by the finance committee is in fact out of order.
When the bill left the House, it dealt with one item and one item only, namely, the elimination of excise tax on jewellery. This was the only thing that was to be considered by the House and by the committee.
When the committee dealt with it, the bill came back significantly amended and the additions were to eliminate the excise tax on clocks and watches and a second addition was to eliminate the excise tax on semi-precious stones.
It is our view that this is well beyond the purview of the committee, that it is in fact out of order on the part of the committee and that a committee is limited in its recommendations to the House, either to report the bill as presented or to defeat the bill. It is not within the scope of the committee to amend the bill in such a significant fashion. Watches, for instance, are items that are separately defined in the Excise Tax Act itself. Therefore, there is a clear delineation in the excise tax between taxation on a watch and taxation on jewellery.
When the bill left the House, there was no reference to watches, clocks or semi-precious stones. When the bill comes back to House, as it will tomorrow, it will have reference, by way of amendment, to those three items of jewellery: semi-precious stones, watches and clocks.
I would solicit from you, Mr. Speaker, a ruling as to whether the bill, as presented to House, as amended by the committee, is in fact in order.