I know. I'm on the amendment.
I want to start by saying I appreciate your giving the floor back to me. I know there was some confusion, and I didn't want you to be left with the impression I didn't notice that you were willing to return the mike to me. I promise I will do my best to avoid any extraneous repetition of the points I have already made. If you sense that I am going in that direction of repetition, perhaps a gesture or a hand signal would be better than cutting off my mike. I have some important points to make, sir.
I was referring to the amendment being no later than June 12, 2008, as Mr. Murphy said. I'm not going to repeat the points I already made about the timing, respecting the witnesses, and the preparation they have talked about. I'm not going to repeat the fact that we've been working on privacy, and how long I've desired to get our committee to that place.
But I want to make an additional point that I think many Canadians would want to note. By placing this amendment to this motion--and I'm going to have to unpack this a little, so please don't say I'm repeating myself--it's like a form of blackmail. Mr. Murphy kind of alluded to that when he said this motion will do no harm to anyone, including the government, as long as they proceed with an inquiry before the deadline.
Is that not what you said, Mr. Murphy, in a paraphrase?
Can I get him to acknowledge with a nod?