Thank you, Chair.
I'm glad we can have a discussion where we acknowledge what people's positions are.
This is with respect to the amendment we're on, the second study. We're proposing, as Conservatives, that we do proceed with doing a study of the government's use of section 107 of the Canada Labour Code.
My colleague opposite suggested that, in her view, it would be important that the study not begin before October 17, due to an internal process the government is undertaking. I don't want to be uncollaborative. I think the majority of the committee wants to see the study take place, as do we. I also don't think it's likely that we would begin that study before October 17 anyway, given that we've now gotten to a point where there's agreement on the need to do a substantial youth unemployment study.
I would propose instead—I don't think it's really necessary, but if it gives members greater ease—that we leave in the study but add a proviso that this study will not begin before October 17, 2025.
I'll look to you, Chair, for advice procedurally here. I wonder if I can subamend the amendment to leave in the study but add that section. You might find that this is too substantial to count as a subamendment, in which case we would have to vote down the amendment, and then I can move that additional proviso as a new amendment.
If the particular desire of the government is to say that because of internal processes they don't want this study to proceed before October 17, we can meet in the middle on that and do the study after October 17. However, if there are other reasons the government doesn't want to do the study at all, then I guess we'll just have to have the votes and let the chips fall where they may.