Thank you.
Well, I welcomed the amendment immediately partly because I was concerned about leaving behind any community. I think this is a committee that really tries to listen, and whether it's seals in Monsieur Blais' riding or lobsters on the east coast or salmon on the west coast, there is a sincere commitment here. So I had some misgivings about opposing the motion that actually passed. I like this. The reason I opposed Gerry's motion was we were onto something relevant that really matters to Canadians. Whether you're on the west coast or not, people care about aquaculture and the salmon.
I think there's a cost-effectiveness involved. When we interrupt our flow, we hurt our cost-effectiveness, and I'm always considering how valuable am I to the taxpayer, how valuable we are as a committee to the taxpayer.
And related to those things is focus. So I'm thinking, “What would Canadians want?” I think Canadians would want us to finish what we're involved in, because it's relevant and it's important, and then by all means we should get onto the community that Gerry is talking about.
So I like the amendment, and unless I can be persuaded to the contrary.... Even though it's Mr. Calkins who raised it, I still like the amendment and I'm going to be supporting it.