Mr. Speaker, contrary to what the member just said, the NDP is not wasting time. In fact, what it is doing is taking this legislation very seriously and wanting to ensure that it has a full and thorough debate.
The member for Windsor West was very clear in his hoist motion. I as well would refer the Speaker to Marleau and Montpetit, at page 672, which makes it very clear that at third reading:
--the legislative process focusses on the final form of the bill. The amendments that are admissible at this stage are exactly the same as those that were admissible at second reading stage. It is in order to propose an amendment for a three- or six-month hoist....
That is exactly what the member did, because the NDP believes that this bill should not be further considered and should be put over.
This is entirely in order. I believe that the point of order just raised is not correct. I would urge you, Mr. Speaker, to take this into consideration and give regard to the fact that the NDP is moving this hoist motion in good faith, with good intentions and within the legislative process that is allowed in the House.