Accepting this presupposes that we take a course of action now, or suggest that the government do so, without having heard a shred of evidence of any kind. That's why the amendment would say, before a report goes to the House with a recommendation, that there be a basis for that recommendation, which we don't now have before this committee.
I still feel that it doesn't really address.... If it's going to go in the form of a report, it's going to have all of the incidences of Standing Order 108 that the motion proposes in the first place. My amendment would suggest that it not go forward as a report to the House, but rather await a proper report when we give it due consideration in September. I'm saying in effect it would not cause us any essential delay. The government has not made any more deportations and has taken due consideration, as past policy has shown, and the government is already taking into consideration humanitarian and compassionate grounds as we speak
I'm saying that before we put a motion forward, we should really deal with the amendment and put the matter to the committee, to study along with the undocumented workers, and have a report in the fall that actually goes to the House for a decision but has some basis upon which we can proceed and go forward. My sense is that even a watered-down motion still goes to the House by way of a report, accomplishing the same thing without a shred of material before this committee.
I would still ask this committee to support the amendment and do this in the proper fashion.