I agree with what Ms. Sgro is saying. The challenge, of course, is that we have a great many great things that we can study in this committee. I've been approached, and I'm interested in a study having to do with disability issues. We have the poverty study and now we're talking about this. And now Mr. Savage has said he's willing to not attach a timeline to it. I guess my argument would be then that we can bring this up at the appropriate time to actually vote on whether we should do it at that time.
If we're not going to do that, if we're not going to attach a timeline to it, if we're just going to vote on it right now, then that would indicate to me that it comes before the poverty study. In my personal view, I think the poverty study is the most important thing we have to do right now.
I'll move an amendment actually here because I am interested in studying this. I think there are many ways we can do it in conjunction with the poverty study. It will probably be discussed right within the poverty study.
My amendment would be that after the word “that”, I would add a comma and say, “upon completion of the poverty study”. That way we can make sure we have our priorities set. The poverty study is the priority. If at the end of the poverty study we want to conduct these hearings, then we can do so.
Given that we're in a minority government situation, and further, I guess, to Mr. Godin's comments, I would say all the more priority should be given to the poverty study to ensure that we complete it before the next election.