The motion was transmitted in both official languages, so that was never an issue. You got it in English, and you got it in French. It was read very slowly, and we had the highest standard of professional simultaneous translation for the benefit of all members of the committee, so there's no need for that.
My challenge to members opposite, Chair, would be to furnish the committee with amendments that they have prepared for the motion that was on notice, which is not that different from the one we have today. I suspect we will find that many of the amendments we're going to see today have been written since we have been in the room, as would have been the case if I had moved the motion that was on notice. This isn't a question of making sure that things are given in both official languages.
After that 20-minute pause, I would be amenable to being able to see all of the amendments that are going to be proposed.
If this is just an exercise in running down the clock, we're not going to support any of the amendments. If we have a couple of good-faith amendments, we want to have a discussion about it where necessary, but if we're just going to pull on every lever to slow things down as much as we can, then we're not going to support the amendments. They can move them. We'll vote against them. We won't speak to them. If we're truly looking to improve on this, let's do that. I don't think it's helpful to say that this is happening because they didn't get it in advance.
First of all, when committee business is before the committee, it's a member's absolute right to not provide the motion in writing. The committee is not entitled to that, but it was provided in writing in both official languages. This is what happens. Amendments can be made on the matter at hand. You can move an amendment without furnishing the committee with it in writing.
I very much understood the intent of Ms. Church's amendment, with the exception of whether it was replacing or supplementing point four. That wasn't said. Once that was simply said, it was crystal clear and I did not have it in front of me.
My colleague, who speaks French as a first language, heard the motion read in English and was able, he tells me, to understand Ms. Church's intent as well. That's how we're able to do this with the services being provided to us.
On what looks like delay for the sake of delay, please prove me wrong.
Through you, Chair, I would ask the members opposite how many amendments they're going to ask us to consider. The request from Mr. Thériault was to see all of the amendments. They had 20 minutes to furnish you with all of them.
Let's just understand what we're dealing with. Do we need to make a request for additional resources? I don't think there are a lot of committees sitting tonight, so let's figure that out.