I have a slightly different opinion, but I respect the chair; therefore, I will move on. Basically, what I'm hearing is that I can't question the scope of the bill.
I just want some clarity around here. I can't get into talking about what is actually in the motion, which is about Bill C-425. The only thing I can talk to is an extension in a vacuum. I would say that the chair has put me in a very difficult position in which I'm having to say, once again, that I feel I'm being asked to make vacuous arguments when I want to make substantive ones.