Sure. If I may say so, I think we're at a delicate moment, and there is some promise of progress, which I certainly don't want to lose. I think it is important to start from a place of not impugning motive.
There are, it seems to me, two proposals from my Liberal colleagues for going forward, which I think are not consistent. The committee has to choose one way forward. On the one hand, we've heard Ms. Duncan's plea to have a bit of a suspension and a conversation among all the parties on how we might move forward. On the other hand, we have Ms. Petitpas Taylor and Mr. Turnbull, who have asked for something in writing from the opposition. Of course, the opposition is not monolithic. We're three different parties with three different interests, and quite often, three different points of view. Sometimes we agree on certain matters—we've agreed on the substance of Ms. Vecchio's motion—but other times we do not agree on many things.
If the Liberals on the committee would like something in writing or a concrete formal proposal from three different parties working together, that will take some time. I don't think that's something that's going to happen with a brief suspension of this meeting. It's something I'm open to offering if the three parties that I just referred to can find a common proposal. I'm hopeful that we can, but there is no guarantee at the outset. That's its own process.
What I think would be productive for us to do, if the government members want something formal from the three opposition parties, is for us to have some time in order to do that. There is time between today's meeting and the next meeting. In the meantime, as Mr. Turnbull said, he's very excited about offering more thoughts on his own amendment. He can do that today up until five minutes to one, eastern time, at which point we should have a vote and decide on that amendment, and then enter into that period between meetings in which the government has asked the opposition parties to speak and to see if we can come up with a common proposal, which we will bring to Thursday's meeting.
At that meeting, we will already have cleared the way, so to speak, for some kind of new attempt at a compromise. It may end up not being any more successful than Mr. Turnbull's first attempt, but at the very least we'd be trying something new and working towards some kind of new compromise. It might precipitate a second productive conversation.
That's why I think it would be best to go with the idea that the opposition parties are going to try to propose a way forward. We will do our best. That is going to take some time. I don't think it will happen during a suspension of this particular meeting.
As a sign of the progress of today's conversation, dispensing with the current amendment would be a good way to conclude this meeting and have the kind of maximally open posture at the beginning of the next meeting to try to get towards some kind of compromise.