Thank you. That's more than adequate.
I want to just continue the tradition I've set of being the only politician at this table to apologize when an apology is warranted.
I want to apologize to the members of the opposition if my earlier remarks suggested that I thought they were colluding in relation to this amendment. In fact I was attempting to suggest exactly the opposite, that even within the same party they weren't talking to each other to find out precisely what they were proposing by way of amendment. If they had been talking to one another, they might have realized that all three of them were proposing the same amendment.
I surely don't mean to suggest that there's anything untoward, or any behind-the-scenes collusion. I mean, there may be, but it's certainly not within my knowledge, so I'm not going to assert that. What I do mean to suggest is that as a group they don't seem to have their act together. They're falling all over each other proposing multiple versions of the same amendment.
That's really all I wanted to say. I apologize if my remarks were construed to refer to collusion.
Thank you.