Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Although I don't have a ton of parliamentary experience, having been elected just over a year ago, I think it's rather inconceivable that the committee is discussing the backlog non-stop and preparing to keep that discussion going into next year. It's going to take a hammer-like approach to fix the problem.
I fully agree with Mr. Brassard's motion. Throwing neither money nor staff at the problem will fix it; the problem is structural. It is the way the system works. My understanding is that the system needs to change but can't right now.
When people say the backlog has been around since 1920 or what have you, that is not an acceptable reason in my eyes. We are talking about human beings here, people who fought for Quebec and Canada. Does this mean Veterans Week is really over? We have sung veterans' praises at every turn this past week, but now, we are talking about the backlog again and we are continuing to accept the unacceptable.
What I take from this is that I would think twice before enlisting, because if I were to enlist, I would have to be careful not to become injured. If I did suffer an injury, the government—the country on whose behalf I had gone abroad to fight—would do an about-face on my return and cause me nothing but headaches.
Accumulating a backlog of this size is unacceptable and sends a lousy message. When your attempt to resolve the problem is in vain, you need to change your approach.
That said, the amendment that was proposed a few minutes ago strikes me as an altogether different motion. I really don't see the connection. I think it will be up to the chair and the clerk to decide.
I have a short amendment to Mr. Brassard's motion. It's pretty straightforward. Should I move it now or later? I'm not sure what I am supposed to do.