Thank you, Mr. Chair.
On this subamendment, which does now have “quality, availability, affordability, accessibility and inclusiveness” back in it, it's just very interesting and telling that the government hasn't been forthcoming in explaining why they took out the “availability” and “accessibility” part of their subamendment.
We know that it's back in, but I think for context we need to understand why, as we vote on this subamendment, it was taken out. We haven't had any rationale from the government. We have the parliamentary secretary here. It's really telling that the government does not want to disclose why they initially took out “availability” and “accessibility”. We've had silence over there.
It's really concerning, especially considering that we're talking about a government bill. As we move forward with the implementation of this bill—as we know, the provinces have signed agreements—it's concerning to know that perhaps “availability” and “accessibility”, in the back of the government's mind, aren't really two important pillars, which they originally had at the forefront of this bill. The government is not willing to make any comment, which I think is saying a lot without saying anything.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.