Yes, so we have 13 meetings. I guess this is what I want to clarify, and I don't want to spend more of the time.... The point of order was on that.
Minister, you can, at the last minute, table specific amendments, but aside from that right now.... I like a lot of what you said here, and there's a ton of things I would like to know, but we don't have a copy of your speech. Is it the intent, then, of the government to have all those meetings and to have all those witnesses come to testify to us about the legislation that you have tabled, which is real, and then the concept is that they have to respond to your testimony here today?
We have asked all those groups to present us with their amendments before they sit down at this table, so my concern is that, if we don't have these specific legal amendments, we then have to go on the speculative assumption of what you said in the last several minutes to weed out all their concerns.
I think we have a huge firestorm that's going to be created here, because I know my phone is going to be ringing off the hook. How do they give a response to the ideas you've promised when we don't have the actual amendments? If we had those amendments right now, those groups and organizations that give us good testimony....
Just for the record, even on Bill C-34, we had to have several time outs because we had to deal with amendments that nobody quite understood the consequences of. Is that the plan? I really appreciate what you have come here with. There are specific things that you have said.... I couldn't even write them down; you talk as quickly as I do. Pat Martin used to say that there are no periods in my Hansards.
What I'm really worried about right here is how we go forward and when we are going to get these specific amendments, because we have to have our legal teams go through them—the Library of Parliament, our analysts and everyone else like that. How do we do that if we don't have anything more than ideas?