Thank you, Mr. Chair.
For people who are maybe trying to follow politics at home, we're trying to be as transparent and accountable as possible on this private member's bill that we're debating right now, which was brought forth by my colleague Ms. Falk to make it equitable for intended parents and surrogate parents so that they also have access to attachment—meaning EI—which makes total sense. It's a great bill.
Then, to my colleague Ms. Gazan's point, when we talk about indigenous families and kinship and customary care, it is a no-brainer to try to reunite families, right? I guess my question, through her, is just on the work she's done. I worked with her on child care around this bill as well, and we were very supportive of ensuring the rights of indigenous peoples.
Through you, Mr. Chair, why wouldn't this just be a no-brainer? I'm having a hard time. If people are watching at home, I guess that would be my question, through you, for Ms. Gazan. Why would we be having comments from the Liberals that there needs to be consultation or that this is an insulting amendment, as has been said today? It's just very confusing, and that they're just abstaining.... That would be my question, through you, Mr. Chair.