Thank you, Ms. Vecchio, for your very apt comments. Our decisions are indeed made as a multipartite committee, but we have responsibilities as the government.
There's nothing unusual in the course of negotiations to request a written statement so that there is something concrete on the table. Of course, in a five-minute meeting, we would not be able to thoroughly debate the matter raised by Mr. Blaikie. However, we were able to agree that we needed to continue to debate the amendment put forward by Mr. Turnbull. Through this amendment, we've put a little water in our wine by agreeing that the Deputy Prime Minister could come and represent the government.
We know that there's a disparity between what you are requesting and what we proposed. That's why we would like to continue to debate it..
As I was saying a few weeks ago, we sincerely believe that the presence of the Prime Minister is not justified in the context of the prorogation for all of the reasons we mentioned in our comments. There is no need to repeat them.
That in fact is what Ms. Duncan is trying to do, by clearly demonstrating why we have enough work in hand to move forward on things like Bill C‑19 and other extremely important issues. That's why we are insisting on having something in writing so that we can compare your requirements to ours. That's why we're going to continue to debate Mr. Turnbull's amendment, for as long as is required. We believe that it's extremely appropriate to continue.