I have two questions about that.
First, I agree on the subamendment. I think it's essential that we have the time we need to do our work properly. This is a bill, not some pointless study. It's important. I'm in favour of Ms. Thomas's subamendment because it allows us a little more time.
However, I have a question in mind, and perhaps the analysts can answer it.
If we proceed as proposed, are we allowing ourselves enough time between the deadline for amendments, May 3, and the start of clause-by-clause, on May 7?