Now I will ask Mr. Garneau. If lines 15 to 18 are at the heart of clause 4, why not vote against clause 4? Why put forward this amendment? Do you have a different understanding of all the testimony we heard in favour of Bill C-393?
As Mr. Masse said, everyone who argued in favour of Bill C-393 saw the problems that lines 15 to 18 presented. Yet it is those very lines that your amendment seeks to remove. Why not just vote against clause 4? Why do you want to remove those lines? Is your understanding different from mine?