I want to thank Mr. Van Bynen for the motion. I think it's very timely. It's very specific. Members opposite want to amend it to expand the scope of it, but there's no question, looking at the original motion: The member has a specific area of focus that he would like this committee to look at, and that's seniors and how they're impacted in rural Ontario and Canada as a whole.
It's interesting, because about half an hour ago, a member from the opposite side said that student hunger, bringing that forward, was silly and it was time for us to get serious. We have a short timeline. At the same time, what this amendment is doing is opening up the scope to make it so wide and not specific. It's doing the exact opposite of what the member argued half an hour ago.
If any of the members on this committee want to introduce a motion that is wider in scope and looks at different issues, they have the opportunity to do that, but to take the original motion and its intent and dilute it in such a way when it's obvious it's focusing on rural Canada and seniors is taking away from its intent.
I take this issue very seriously, just like I take student hunger very seriously, and I think we should focus on the specific scope of what the member's trying to achieve here.