Okay.
I gather that in the initial drafting of the bill, Mr. Chair, this was a flaw—an error that was created and that we're endeavouring to fix. That is a good thing.
I would make the point that, for example, with pay equity, similar flaws—even greater flaws—were not addressed at all, so I'm happy that Mr. Fergus has offered this amendment. It just sheds light on all of the other amendments that have been rejected by the government over the course of the last few hours. Those flaws could have been addressed, but the government chose not to. What we come out of this process with is deeply flawed legislation.
We've improved some components, but we're coming out with deeply flawed legislation that will be subject to court challenge. For the life of me, I cannot understand why the government has been so obstinate in not accepting improvements that needed to be done on the bill. In this particular case, with Mr. Fergus, I think it's offered in good faith and, again, I think the opposition members reach across to the government and say, yes, we want to improve this bill.
I certainly will be supporting this amendment, but we should have spent the whole day reaching across the aisle and adopting a whole range of amendments that would have improved the bill.