I had the floor. I'd like to ask a question about something from the other day.
Before I put my question to Ms. Desrochers, I want to say that, once again, we're seeing the same thing we saw on April 16. I didn't have a chance to speak to it at the time, so I want to reiterate what some have already said.
Mr. Chair, we're in this situation this morning because, once again, you didn't consult the vice-chairs. That said, I gave you the benefit of the doubt. I raised this on April 16 because, without consulting the vice-chairs, you decided to change the agenda and postpone the study of Bill C‑222. I asked whether you would commit going forward to consulting the vice-chairs before making changes to the agenda. It's in the blues. You made a formal commitment to consult the vice-chairs before changing the agenda of a meeting. That's where a lot of the frustration comes from. It's in the blues from the April 16 committee meeting. I think what we're experiencing this morning is a repetition of the lack of consultation with the vice-chairs. As Conservative colleagues who would have liked to prepare have said, a clause-by-clause study isn't done like this, without notice and without consultation with the vice-chairs. People need to be ready. That's why we're in this situation.
Now that I've finished my remarks on that point, I have a question about what you circulated, Ms. Desrochers: Which minister and which secretary of state are we talking about? I just want to be clear. That's my question.
Also, why do you want to complete the study on the youth unemployment report before the study on housing starts?
I'm asking these questions to get an explanation.