I believe it's still on the question of whether or not NDP-1 is in order. I'm going to be completely transparent on this now. Of all the amendments, G-1 is obviously our favourite, but we could support NDP-1, most likely. We may offer an amendment to it, but as a starting point, among NDP-1, CPC-1 and BQ-1, the one that we would find the most similar to our values would be NDP-1.
The only way to get there—you can tell—is to have the chair's ruling overturned and allow NDP-1 to be moved. Then we would work to amend NDP-1 to try to get to a position where we could all agree with it. That would be what we would do. I'm not advising you to overturn the chair. I'm just saying that this is probably our way through this.
Let me be clear and say that I've been a chair of a committee for many years. The reality is that the chair doesn't write those decisions; the legislative clerk writes those decisions. They're based on years of experience.
We still agree that it is out of scope, but if the ruling is overturned, we would find a way to work with that one to try to get consensus on how we have a better clause 2.