Mr. Speaker, I would like to address the comments made by the parliamentary secretary to the government House leader prior to question period regarding the point of order of the member for Edmonton West.
The parliamentary secretary made a comparison to the estimates being an order of the House to bring in an appropriation bill and a ways and means motion being an order of the House to bring in a tax bill to make his point that the supply bill was in order. While this comparison on this one point is true, it fails to consider the more stringent requirement applied by our rules to supply bills, which the member for Edmonton West referred to earlier.
On page 883 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, there is a more stringent requirement applied to supply bills. It states, “Supply bills must be based on the estimates or interim supply as concurred in by the House.” There is no such language for bills based on ways and means.
This is a very significant difference, Mr. Speaker, and I urge you to consider this as you determine whether this bill is in fact in order.