The intention was to replace it with that: Basically, let's get this done. My concern is that with the way things are going, as some members maybe want to do, we will basically eat up time over the next two and a half meetings so that the deadline comes and goes, there is no report, and then we move on to Bill C-19 without ever having tabled this report.
So yes, it does get rid of those timelines. The theory is that before we do anything...and there's nothing preventing us from meeting the timeline of Mr. Blaikie. That would obviously be our preference. I just don't want to see us hit June 11 and have missed our own deadline, which we set whether we voted in favour of it or not. The thing is that we want to finish this report and have the report tabled before we go to the next order of business. It does get rid of the timeline, which hopefully we can still meet, but I do not want to see the next three meetings—if we have extra meetings, obviously I'm okay with that as well—eaten up by debating the minutiae of a report for the sole purpose of killing time to get beyond that deadline.
I live in constant optimism that our friends from all parties will meaningfully come to the table, present their suggestions to the report, and not spend two hours debating a comma or a period, but we shall see. Obviously, I am one of four official opposition members of the committee. I can count relatively well, so obviously it's the will of the committee. That's where we're at.
Madam Chair, I will leave my comments there.