Mr. Speaker, the matter that was just dealt with is very much relevant to another situation.
Since the Chair has taken the time to consider the rules, I refer specifically to Motion No. 135 that was dealt with by the House on September 27, and for which there was an amendment proposed later in the debate. The same question about whether it was in order came up. I am aware that the decision was deferred until some consideration could be given.
I have taken the time to look at some of the details and I have become aware of a couple of issues, certainly with regard to the discussion we just have had.
First, the motion in essence asked the government to consider selling the land on which the Queensway Carleton Hospital sits for one dollar. The amendment, with the appropriate wording changes, sought to change it all to say “continuing to lease” the land to the hospital for one dollar starting in the year 2013 because there was an existing lease. I do not have to explain the difference in the nature of a sale and a lease. The ownership interest is a significant change.
Also, it has come to my attention that there is an issue with regard to the laws governing the custodianship of National Capital Region properties, particularly the greenbelt which is what we are talking about, and the authority of the National Capital Commission to dispose of that property in any way, shape or form.
There are some other issues and the references that the deputy House leader gave with regard to Erskine May's 22nd edition, section 343, and the references that you made, Mr. Speaker, to the House orders.
With regard to the ruling on the admissibility of the amendment, I would hope that these additional items would be taken into consideration.