I want to begin by pointing out that this was a motion put forward by the NDP, one that we spent four or five meetings debating, if I remember correctly. In addition, we have spent more than six meetings discussing the report. I would think that Mr. Bachrach came prepared, knowing that he would be participating in the committee. That's what I would do if I was standing in for someone else.
At another meeting, we spoke at length about the fact that things had changed since the report had been drafted and that we had the option of preparing a dissenting opinion or supplementary report. I think it's important for the parties to remember they have that option.
It's also important to remember that the witnesses who appear before committees are experts. They've done research on the subject and examined the situation. They aren't people who just walked in off the street. For all those reasons, I agree with Mr. Bachrach's motion. At Monday's subcommittee meeting, I actually made a similar suggestion. I proposed that we focus on the paragraphs that were the sticking points and adopt the rest. That requires a show of good faith on everyone's part.
I repeat, we have the ability to submit a dissenting or supplementary report.