Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Yes, I agree. I saw the original motion by Ms. Nash and I didn't think it was a bad idea, though I thought it was too restrictive in its approach, particularly in relation to item ii), unemployment and the contributing factors. I simply thought it was too restrictive in its approach. I think there's a much better solution. We have done some good things, I know, as a government with the knowledge infrastructure program and some different trade training, etc., but I don't think it's enough. I believe we can do a lot more. I think Ms. Nash's motion is a good one in substance, but I certainly think the amendments made by Mr. Saxton would give us a better ability to be more broad in scope and not be restricted.