I also want to indicate why this should actually be in here. Similarly, it's part of the consultation process as well, as far as we're concerned. I think it's quite timely, given the fact that we've seen the Idle No More movement, and the first nations, the Inuit, the Métis, and the general public coming forward and saying that these people have not been treated fairly. The government has basically not been responsible with respect to their judiciary responsibility.
This is exactly what this bill is all about. Yes, you indicated earlier that the people had a say and they didn't quite get everything that they wanted, but they wanted the bill to go forward. Of course they wanted the bill to go forward knowing full well that it was going to come to a committee so that they could have their voices heard with respect to amendments, to have that second thought, because this is where we should be able to make amendments.
To come to committee and have the government basically throw out every amendment that's going to be put forward I think is shameful. Are you saying that these people came here to voice their concerns, and it was all for nothing? Have taxpayers paid all of this money to have them come here to basically ignore what people are saying?
For these people coming to committee is not full consultation. You indicated in your remarks earlier that 13 aboriginal groups, governments, and adjacent jurisdictions were part of the drafting of the legislation, but that still leaves a lot of people who haven't been consulted, and this piece would actually allow for that. So in putting this piece forward, I'm just wondering how this would hinder the legislation. Why can't we put this in there?