I have a couple of points. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Sheehan, for proposing this study. I think most of us would agree—I haven't heard from everyone, however—that this is a very pressing issue to study, so I laud you for proposing it.
I agree with you that the quantum of the meetings makes a lot of sense.
What I would say in respect of what Mr. Hoback raised earlier is that while I appreciate that we've just passed a routine motion talking about the subcommittee on procedure, I think this matter is quite timely. Therefore, for the purposes of getting started with committee business, I propose that we vote on this particular motion now, so that the committee can start its scheduling, preparing witnesses, etc., as opposed to waiting for the subcommittee on procedure to convene.
I think the language could be a bit more elegant, so I'm going to take a stab at it, because I am a lawyer, Madam Chair, and this is what lawyers do. I would say it should read to the effect, “the ongoing trade challenges faced by Canadian workers in industry as regards the United States' Build Back Better legislation, buy America policy, and EV tax credit provisions and that the committee reports its findings to the House”. I think that would encompass everything that Mr. Hoback mentioned and be a bit tighter in terms of the grammar.