Thank you, Mr. Chair.
To address Mr. Poilievre's comments, I agree it's not ideal that we pass these types of legislation in a short period of time. I don't think that anybody would prefer this type of short timeline. The reality that we've seen over the last almost two years is that we've had to do so because of the urgency and the unpredictability of this pandemic.
I also do not agree that we are trying to ram through this legislation, and with the greatest respect to my colleague from the Bloc Québécois, we are not lazy in any way.
What I think we would be willing to propose is that we take every opportunity for committee time this week to make sure we have the right witnesses, we have the time to ask the questions, we have the time to meet with officials, we have the time to meet with the minister, and we have the time to actually go through this bill in as deep a manner as possible and as quickly as possible.
I agree with my colleague Mr. Baker that it is important for us to have a timeline. It is important for us to pass this bill before we rise for the winter session. As everyone knows, or as most of us know, existing supports ended November 20. We also know that the recovery has been uneven. We know that the hardest-hit industries need our support. We also know that the public health situation remains uncertain and unpredictable, particularly now that we have omicron.
I think it's very, very important for us to be considering this excellent bill. There are a series of measures whereby, if certain parts of our country have to go into lockdown, both businesses and individuals would have access to lockdown support. It is urgent that we see if we can reach an agreement on a timeline that would allow us to properly study this bill and properly ask the questions in an expedited manner, but that would also allow us, before we rise for the winter session, to pass this bill.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.