SPEAKER: Before I hear from any other member—because I don't want this debate going off in a way which is contrary to the Standing Orders—I let Dr Smith, as the father of the House, have a long period for his argument. But I am going to, before I hear anyone else, draw everyone's attention to Standing Order 307(5), which postdates Dr the Rt Hon Lockwood Smith's ruling. It was a matter that was carefully considered by the Standing Orders Committee and by the House in the adoption of the changes of the Standing Orders in 2011. What 307(5) says is "Where amendments are proposed that, in the opinion of the chairperson, are the same in substance, the chairperson may select amendments…" etc. That is a much tighter arrangement than what used to occur, and that was a very deliberate decision of the Standing Orders Committee under the leadership of Dr the Rt Hon Lockwood Smith. It was, of course, a unanimous decision of the committee and of the Parliament to change the rules to that effect. So we've gone from having any suggestion of an objective test to one which is subjective. The Chair has made it very clear what her opinion is, and that is not something for the House to second guess.