That was number two. Point number three is that, when the motion was presented in the first House meeting after the pandemic started and we were all shipped out of Ottawa, part of the motion was the (k) part:
(k) the Standing Committee on Finance be instructed to commence a review of the provisions and operation of the COVID-19 Emergency Response Act within six months of the day on which the act receives royal assent and to report its findings to the House no later than Wednesday, March 31, 2021....
What we're proposing in point three is that, in order to meet the requirements of that motion in the House, our very first meeting in the fall when the House reconvenes would be on that topic, to kind of organize ourselves. Then we would set that topic aside while we do pre-budget consultations and get that work done. As soon as possible after the pre-budget consultations are in the works, we would do the requirements to get a report done by March 31—hear the witnesses, complete it and have the report in the House no later than March 31. That way we're not mixing up the two subjects, and we meet the requirements that the House has asked us to meet by starting within six months.
That's the report. Does somebody want to move the report as amended with those slight changes that we've made, changing (f) to ensure that, if it's bilingual, it will go to the digital binder, and for June 25 we'll rejig that meeting. Does somebody want to move that?