Procedure and House Affairs committee  We are still in the process of doing it. They are quite technical. It is complicated to analyze, so we are looking at that. We usually look at how the vote is going to affect one versus the other, the line conflict and so on. If there are some that need to be grouped together b

Procedure and House Affairs committee  Right.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  It was distributed Tuesday, I believe. It is the final one

Procedure and House Affairs committee  Yes.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  No, it can be separate.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  You give the rulings.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  I agree with your assessment, Mr. Nater, that you can't amend a section of the act that's not opened by the bill. There's an exception to that, and this is the exception. We just voted on LIB-60, which creates new proposed subsection 510.001, and there's a reference to it in LIB-

Procedure and House Affairs committee  Within the bill, do you mean?

Procedure and House Affairs committee  Yes.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  The bill is adopted at second reading by the House based on the number of concepts they want to add to the act, so those are the parameters that you have to stand by basically, the frame, if you will. In this case, there are two problems, if you want to put it that way. There's

Procedure and House Affairs committee  I'm reading the whole amendment as it stands right now. It's that Bill C-76 in clause 372 be amended by replacing line 6 on page 229 with the following: (a) the other elector resides in a polling division assigned to the polling station.

Canadian Heritage committee  May I read it back for everyone?

Canadian Heritage committee  With the subamendment, the amendment would now read: That Bill C-391, in Clause 3, be amended by replacing line 14 on page 1 with the following: “the provinces and territories, in accordance with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, including A

Canadian Heritage committee  Let me go back a minute, to amendment LIB-1. That amendment was asking that Bill C-391, in clause 2, be amended by replacing lines 6 to 11 on page 1 with the following: 2 in this Act, minister means the Minister of Canadian Heritage. By doing that, everything in lines 6 to 11

Canadian Heritage committee  I am trying to understand what Mr. Nantel wants to do. He would like to amend paragraph (b) of amendment LIB-3, which proposes the following wording: acquire or reacquire Indigenous human remains or cultural property; Is that correct?