I guess as a rebuttal there, I believe we likely did hear from them in reference to the original Bill C-21, which was about a handgun freeze, not about this amendment.
The government has now tabled an amendment that would significantly change the scope of the bill. That was debated in the first committee meeting. I don't want to get into a debate about the scope, but my point is that it's relevant information about the fact that the government has now introduced, through a table-drop amendment, a fundamental change to what the bill is about, and we haven't had the appropriate consultation on that.
Regardless, let's go—