I obviously didn't want to counter the point made by my colleague, but the reason I think he said that was because earlier on, when this debate started, Chair, we asked for specific recommendations, and we weren't getting clarity on that. I think that's what prompted the suggested change. So if there's a technical term that's more appropriate, I think we're willing to go with that. The intent is still the same. We want clarification on what “recommendation” is. If that refers to the fact that the trade tribunal makes recommendations as opposed to decisions, that's fine. That's all we want clarification on. That's point one.
The second point I've made with respect to the word “consider” is simply to come to terms with this motion so we can get all parties to agree on it. That was my intent. I've said from the outset that I understand the intent and the spirit of this motion. I understand the urgency with respect to Monsieur Cardin's concerns. So I'm not here to try in any way, shape, or form to compromise his position. I'm just trying to come to some sort of consensus on this particular motion so we can proceed with other issues.