Thank you very much.
I have a couple of thoughts. One, I do hope that the whips are talking in the event that we do need extra time. I've endeavoured to reach out on that front, to make sure that my people, at least, are aware of the need for some discussion outside or around this table in order to get us more time, if that's what we need.
I'm not sure I like the precedent, but I also recognize that we are in an extraordinary time. I think the proceedings of the House today affirm that in no uncertain terms. One other option I would want to proceed with—only if everyone, and I mean everyone, at the table is comfortable with it—would be to empower the subcommittee to adopt a study motion in respect of the financial aspect of the emergency measures act.
This would mean that if we did have a subcommittee meeting tomorrow, representatives from each party would be able to discuss, negotiate and determine the scope of that study. Any amendments that members from any side have could be considered at that time. We could vote on it. The study could be approved before the end of the day tomorrow if the committee is willing to delegate its authority to the subcommittee.
I don't think that would make sense as a best practice or a precedent, but given that it pertains to emergency measures, given the pandemic, and given that the hybrid format necessitated by the pandemic is creating some artificial time constraints, I think this is one way of trying to get around those.
I would look to Mr. McLean, Mr. Beech and Monsieur Ste-Marie to see if that might be acceptable to them. I'm prepared to stay as long as the whips will let us in order to deal with amendments, if that's what it takes in order to get a study motion approved that will provide the proper authority for the clerk to invite witnesses and to set up a meeting early next week on this matter.