On the motion, Mr. Chair, the first point was a point of order, and I think that has been resolved.
But on this motion, I really find it unbelievable that we've had a motion tabled and we've started to debate it, and the second speaker on that motion was Mr. Anderson, who talked it out until the end of the committee. He's a little late, in my view, coming to consideration of wanting to do the report on the APF. We support doing the APF report. We want it done.
There is other business by way of motion that is already partly discussed. The government's parliamentary secretary filibustered time away at a meeting and we lost that time to get that order of business behind us so that we can go to the agricultural policy framework.
The fact of the matter is I've seen the Canadian Federation of Agriculture's letter and I agree with it. But I have also seen a number of letters from farmers who are basically destitute as a result of the government's decision on the family farm options program. They're concerned that the government took $246 million out of their pocket. They want that issue discussed as well. Tax accountants are saying they've never seen such an outrageous decision by the government. They want action on that motion. So I think proper procedure should be that we finish the motions, as we were already partly through the discussion on them, and then we'll get to the APF.
If the government wants to move right away on these motions, I think we could get to the APF discussion before this meeting is over—unless, of course, the parliamentary secretary is going to continue to filibuster.