Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I think fundamentally I don't disagree with the proposed amendment from the parliamentary secretary. The only piece—and I don't know whether the parliamentary secretary would entertain a subamendment or not, but I'll look to see how he feels about it—is the second bracket, where it says, “(2) Paragraph 116(4)(c.1) of the Act is repealed.” That actually talks about the sunset provisions. Clearly what it would do is sunset this piece.
I think what we're trying to suggest to the government is that we understand overall there's a sunset provision for sure, not that we necessarily agree with that either, but if this is left in place without a sunset provision, the message it sends is that there will be something in place. I'm sure the government will tell me that they intend to put something new in place, but if it doesn't get there in time, we at least have this. That's why I would suggest to them that if they were willing to perhaps negate that, not suggesting that....
We like the spirit and the intent of what the suggestion of the amendment is, so I don't know whether the other side is willing to do that or not, but I'll see how they feel about it, Mr. Chair.