Then how is it possible that you could have written:
they will offer sub amendments to the NDP.amendments
-to increase the connection test to 1095 days, only for parents, and by right vs. grant.
Those are three distinct ideas that were then done at this committee to one of the NDP amendments. It was debated. The officials had come here to inform the committee on what the impact would be of each amendment.
That's when I raised a point of privilege. I understand that sometimes stakeholders discuss things and may come to an understanding, but you had the numbers, which we now understand came from Michèle Vallée. Then you basically described what would happen at committee. Your sense of divination is expert if you were able to guesswork.
I'm just wondering. At this meeting with the NDP, did they communicate to you in writing? Were they very specific on what they had been told by other members and what happened?