I disagree. I think the minister communicated an openness and willingness to amend the bill, which is what you guys have been saying in the House. How can you fault a minister for that? Plus, a study normally has at least 10 meetings of witnesses. That will help inform the refinement of those general themes and ideas about how to amend the bill. I think that's very reasonable.
That's my perception of it. If members are willing, we could make sure that the minister and team provide more detail by the end of next week at the latest. That's what I would propose.