With all due respect to Mr. Lake, just because he is opposed to a bill does not mean that it was ill conceived. Otherwise, it would mean that he has perfection on his side, something that we can not easily acknowledge. Each party works hard to ensure that the bills tabled are constructed in the best possible way.
In my opinion, these bills have considerable merit, especially since the House determined that they should be considered at second reading and possibly at third reading. That is already an acknowledgment of their considerable merit. The bills mentioned have much value and were not selected precisely because of political or ideological positions.
This is the kind of debate in which we are engaged, Mr. Chairman. I do not want to belabour the point, but this bill has considerable merit because its objective is to help people, particularly people in need of assistance, for example, disabled persons—like the ones here today—or persons on low incomes. The bill would provide them with the means to become as self-sufficient as they possibly can. Admittedly, Mr. Chairman, that is a very laudable objective.
We are facing a technical problem that can be resolved two ways. We could decide to stop right here and the government party could then proceed to throw everything out immediately. We are not the bill's sponsors. We could also get together the members of the support team, that is the clerk or other individuals, and one representative of each party to see if the will exists to put forward an amendment that could be debated and in the process, correct the bill's shortcoming. The fact is that some provisions will have the opposite effect of what the bill intended. That is a fact. The aim of the bill is not to take away from the provinces and from Quebec any rights in the area of compensation. That is not the objective.
Once we realize that, then we need to ask ourselves how the bill can be amended. It is not difficult. The first step, in my opinion, is to ask if the amendment can be debated. If the government party says that it wants nothing to do with the amendment, then I do not think we will be able to proceed much further. The clerk has indicated that we can suspend the sitting and discuss this amongst ourselves. That is what I suggested we do from the very beginning, Mr. Chairman.