Thank you very much.
Mr. Hogg was not the only one to have such an opinion. Mr. Fabien Gélinas defended more or less the same thesis, basically saying that from a legal standpoint the government had found an indirect way of doing what it was not able to do directly. The fact remains that according to these two individuals, Bill C-20's constitutionality is legally defensible because there is no obligation to appoint senators selected in the consultative process. Rather, it involves, quite simply, changes to issues that fall under Parliament's areas of jurisdiction.
I'm not an expert in constitutional matters, and my knowledge on the subject is quite limited, in this particular case. Jacques Gourde even admitted at the last meeting that he was not a specialist either.
I'd like you to explain to us exactly what would fall under the jurisdiction of the House of Commons should there be Senate reform or constitutional amendments. That's very much what Mr. Hogg and Mr. Gélinas focused on. And I admit that I didn't really understand.