Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order, please. I have already taken that matter under advisement, and I will be dealing with it right now.

First, I will advise the House that our Rule 27.(5)(a) allows that when two MUPIs are filed, if the first one is not debated, then the Speaker can take into consideration the second one filed. Because the motion of the member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton) was ruled out of order, we can proceed to consider the motion of the honourable member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux).

The required notice for this motion was provided. As has been noted previously in the ruling, the role of the Speaker when a matter of urgent public importance is raised is for the Speaker to judge whether the ordinary opportunities provided by the rules of the House do not permit the subject to be brought on early enough and to rule on whether the public interest demands that discussion take place immediately.

The member does have another opportunity to raise this matter. The debate on the concurrence motion in Committee of Supply will soon commence, at which time the member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux), as well as any other member wishing to do so, can so pose questions and debate the matter. I have not been convinced that the public interest will suffer if the member for Inkster's motion is not debated today. Therefore, I rule that the motion is out of order.

Mr. Lamoureux: With respect, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I would have to challenge your ruling.

Mr. Deputy Speaker: The ruling of the Chair has been challenged.

Mr. Deputy Speaker: All those in favour of the ruling of the Chair, please say yea.

Some Honourable Members: Yea.

Mr. Deputy Speaker: All those opposed, please say nay.

Some Honourable Members: Nay.

Mr. Deputy Speaker: In my opinion, the Yeas have it.

Mr. Kowalski: Yes, I believe that if you canvass the Chamber you will find, as an independent member, I believe that there are other members who believe the needs of the Ombudsman's office is needed and would support a recorded vote.

Mr. Deputy Speaker: Does the honourable member have support for a recorded vote?

Some Honourable Members: Yes.

Some Honourable Members: No.

An Honourable Member: Are four members on their feet? That is what you have to have, four members standing to their feet.

Mr. Deputy Speaker: The honourable member for The Maples does not have support for the recorded vote.

Mr. Deputy Speaker: The honourable member for Inkster, on a point of order.

Mr. Lamoureux: Just on a point of order for clarification for a process in the future, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I believe that when someone does stand and request a recorded vote, the question then should be put: Does he have the support? I personally support the member for The Maples. I am sure that there might be other members. Maybe what a more appropriate thing would be to ask for those who might support the member so that we know if in fact he does have that support, should maybe rise in their place.

Mr. Deputy Speaker: The honourable member did not have a point of order. I have clearly ruled that the honourable member did not have support. I have asked the question, and if the honourable member wants to challenge--

Mr. Deputy Speaker: The honourable member for Inkster, on a point of order.

Mr. Lamoureux: On a point of order, I would ask the Deputy Speaker: How would he know that the member for The Maples (Mr. Kowalski) does not have the support of the four people?

An Honourable Member: There were not four members standing on their feet. That is why.

Mr. Lamoureux: Well, there was no requirement. The government House leader said that there was not four members standing on their feet. Is that what is supposed to happen? I am just looking for guidance on this, Mr. Deputy Speaker, because I am sure it will happen in the future. If a recorded vote is requested by any member--

Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order, please. I would like to remind the honourable member that I have ruled on this matter, that the honourable member did not have support. I have done it in the past where the member has asked me for the support, and I have recognized it when someone has said yes for the member. So there is a way to do it.

Mr. McCrae: On a point of order, if we review Rule 10.(8), it says: "Upon a division, the 'Yeas' and 'Nays' shall not be entered in the Votes and Proceedings unless demanded by not less than four members." I have only heard the demand made by one or two members, and that is not four.

Mr. Lamoureux: Well, how do you know?

Mr. Deputy Speaker: I thank the honourable government House leader for that, but I have already made my ruling. I have decided--[interjection] Order, please. I have made a ruling. If the honourable member wants to challenge my ruling, that is up to him, but I have made my ruling. We are just going on and on in debating with the Chair at this time. I thank the honourable member.