Maybe we're building a consensus. Our issue is that Mr. Martin says there is not noteworthy progress towards the goal. In my estimation, there is noteworthy progress but not sufficient progress. So taking everything out of the motion after “2000” eliminates the quibbling. The point is resolving the Government of Canada to develop a plan, and that's what needs to happen. The word “now” doesn't address the fact that we're studying this very issue and have some recommendations. If we change the word “now” for the words “taking into consideration the committee's report”, then I think we'll have it covered. We're not getting into the specifics of whether we have made progress or how much progress we've made. We're saying we want to have the government's report, but only after it has taken into account what we're going to recommend.
So I would suggest we could reach a consensus by eliminating, as Mr. Lobb said, all that portion after “2000”, taking the word “now” out after “be it resolved that the Government of Canada develop a plan”, and by adding “after taking into consideration the committee's report, a plan to eliminate poverty in Canada”.
So maybe there is room for a compromise, and it would be a good compromise to make a statement in time for Mr. Martin.