The motion I'm looking at is actually one that the House directed us to take back that the government voted for. It was actually Mr. Lemieux who amended the concurrence motion. It was the government who then voted non-concurrence, in their very own report that this committee sent to the government. I'm not sure why my colleagues on the other side would have voted with the government against their own report, since it was theirs, but they did. However, that's neither here or there; they can decide how to do that.
My question is pretty simple: Are we talking about the report that we presently have in front of us, which we did before? Or, are we only talking about the amendment to the fact that we didn't concur? If it's the report, it opens up everything. If it's not, it narrows the scope quite closely.