I would just like speak to this process. I'm new to this committee, so I'm not sure what the habit is.
We had a deadline to get in amendments. We all were given lots of time. We had those amendments drafted as a courtesy to all the members of this committee, I would think, so that we all know what the amendments are. It's a very, very thick bill, and it's hard to know where we're going in the bill. Of course, it gives us some time to study the amendments and to consult with stakeholders and our staff and team to determine how we'll vote.
At this committee, I heard the Conservatives say that they would pass this bill as is, in a heartbeat, if they could get their way, I guess, in having a witness come. They didn't get their way on the witness—although I suppose they still could call Mr. Carney in a few weeks, if they wanted to, in the study—but they're now forcing us to go clause by clause without any amendments.
I'm just wondering if my Conservative colleagues can perhaps explain to me why they would do that. Why are we voting on each clause, when they've submitted no amendments, have no discussion on them, and are forcing recorded votes when we could have votes on division?
There are how many clauses, again?