Let us reconvene. Let's get back to the issue at hand before the break.
Some concerns have been raised regarding the admissibility of amendment BQ-4. You've put the chair in a somewhat difficult position, which I recognize is your job, in the sense that I'm being essentially asked to rule on an amendment that has not yet been moved, and in fact Monsieur Bigras specifically asked that it be stood.
I will say this in an attempt to be helpful. I examined BQ-4, as we had already talked about, and was of the opinion that it was admissible because of the differences that I mentioned. The other ones are very specific; this is very vague. It does not presuppose the outcome of a future negotiation. If Monsieur Bigras wishes to formally move the amendment right now, then I'd be pleased to hear any points of order regarding its admissibility. But my initial impression is that it would be in order.
So does the committee wish to stand BQ-4, or do members wish to have it moved and deal with it now?