Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Chair, it's a very strange circumstance that we find ourselves going clause by clause. It's called clause by clause for a reason. We typically go clause by clause as a committee, especially on legislation where, it is fair to say in this case, there are different points of view depending on perspectives across the country. It would be a very important part of the parliamentary process to go clause by clause. It's highly unusual to do it. I've never seen a report that would have as divided or as wide a range of views across the country on it. I've never seen a report just pass through without amendment. I've never seen that happen before.
We're just debating right now the process on a motion put forward by the NDP, and members from the Liberals and Bloc have indicated they're going to support it. First of all, I find it completely unacceptable that I don't have the opportunity on behalf of my constituents in Edmonton—Wetaskiwin, on an issue which everybody in this room could understand would be important to them, to even talk about the individual clauses of a report. I've never been a part of a process in my 17 years as a member of Parliament on something that would have such a wide range of views. You see things that are unanimous where there's unanimous approval of something, maybe, but not on something like this.
It sounds like this is where the committee is going. It sounds like members from the Liberal government, the NDP and the Bloc are united on moving this forward without any possibility to have amendments.
Mr. Chair, let me put on the record—and I'm glad we're in public for this so Canadians can see this process unfolding—that I am very concerned about the precedent this sets.