Thank you, Mr. Chair.
This is our first meeting and we already have some crucial choices to make. I've heard a lot of good arguments from all the members who have spoken on the motion. We all recognize the need for urgent action. Yes, the government has been dragging its feet. Yes, it took two months after the election for the House of Commons to reconvene. The Standing Committee on Finance is only now beginning to sit, yet this has to all be voted on and passed at third reading in the House by next Friday, for the sake of the businesses and the people who are depending on these subsidies.
Do we have to tie our hands today by agreeing to have clause‑by‑clause consideration completed by Friday?
My NDP colleague Mr. Blaikie made some good points. Often, we adjust our amendments or assess the bill based on what we hear from the witnesses who appear before this committee. That's what committees are for: we look at bills in more detail, we ask ourselves whether or not what they propose is good, and we assess how they will affect various groups.
I find it quite restricting to agree to a motion that says we'll wrap everything up by Friday, when we haven't even heard from witnesses or started the work.
That is why I support my colleague Mr. Poilievre's amendment. However, I want to remind the committee that it is very important that we proceed expeditiously with this bill. As my Liberal colleague Ms. Dzerowicz said, our committee has a number of hours this week that it can spend on this bill. So I am confident that we will be able to complete the bulk of the work. However, I find that imposing a time constraint on us, by setting the deadline for Friday before we start, is like writing the conclusion before the bulk of the work.
Finally, I know we are discussing the amendment, but I want to thank Mr. Beech for his answers to my questions.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.