I am not trying to make things difficult. I just want to explain what brought us to this point. This proposal is further to my suggestion.
There are two options. The first is that, in light of the procedure, we discuss the proposal immediately after hearing from the witnesses and vote today. Personally, I would prefer to hear what the minister has to say about this issue before we vote. In fact, if the motion is not agreed to, procedure dictates that we vote today instead of Thursday, or around 5:15 p.m. or 5:20 p.m., depending on how things go. That is the idea. Either we hear from the minister before we debate the motion, or we do not. The purpose of the motion is to give the minister a chance to have a say before we make a decision. That is why I asked that we put off making the decision.