My intention in making this amendment was to provide additional clarity. There was some debate as to what was actually transpiring and when the minister would table something.
The motion calls for the minister to appear following the tabling and release of the government's response, but there wasn't clarity as to the timeline. It's been 10 months, so if the government can clarify whether it's a week or two away, it won't be necessary to draw attention to 10 months of inaction on this. It can stay as is, as long as there is a commitment.
Perhaps they would even like to make an amendment committing that the minister will table a response within the next short timeframe. Then I'd be more than happy to remove an amendment that perhaps some on the opposite side see as embarrassing because there has been no action in the last 10 months.