Mr. Chair, I would like to raise another point.
As an opposition member who carried her bill through all the stages and brought it all the way to royal assent, I just want to say that I think there is a better way to consider this matter in committee over the next month without necessarily having to extend the sittings. I don't see why we couldn't find some time in the schedule for a few individuals who would be willing to come testify by April 23.
I sort of feel like we are being taken for fools when we are told that the point is simply to allow us to carry out a better study. You say the bill will have to be reported back to the House by June 11, followed by the stage when amendments are considered and the third reading. The report stage will actually come first because amendments will be proposed in committee. Then comes the third reading and the vote. The bill will then move on to the Senate. With all those stages, you are telling me that this bill will be passed before the House adjourns.
I think that is really unrealistic and basically a way to quietly kill this bill. I don't see how we could possibly fail to carry out a study by April 23, as we have been doing with all other private members' bills. That approach works really well.