Thank you, Chair.
As an observation, I think everybody I've heard speak actually agrees with the intent of the motion. The issue here is timing. In terms of the subject, in reading the NSICOP report and hearing the testimony, and from personal experience both because I'm now an elected official but also from speaking with some academics and others I know who are researching these sorts of things, the proliferation of hate-based extremism and its impact on society is absolutely astounding. Certainly there's a whole range of subjects that will be studied on top of that which won't be the subject of parliamentary review, I'm sure.
My comments are simply this. I agree with the motion, but to suggest that it should pre-empt or be prioritized over all of the other work.... I'd be happy if it could be slotted in to free meetings, or if there's a change in schedule between now and whenever the next opportunity arises. It's very important, but so are some of the other things we're doing.
I would support the amendment for the timing, but I also plan to support the general motion. So far I have not heard any opposition to it. Really, we're just debating the timing. We're not debating the substance of the motion.