Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I will say, in answer to Mr. Motz's comments about having other things to do, that every NDP MP—and I think it's the same with the Bloc—has four hats they have to wear. If we can find time to come here, I think Conservatives should be able to as well.
If what I'm hearing from my Conservative colleagues is that they are going to try to slow down or block the bill, that is different from our having good faith on all sides to actually proceed through. For example, if we have a meeting from 3:30 to midnight on Monday, when we come back that second week, we should actually be able to make real progress if there's good faith on all sides to improve the bill of course. But there is a difference between having an extended hearing with a filibuster and having an extended hearing at which we are systematically working through amendments.
We all agree that this bill has to be improved. I think in good faith we can do that the second week back. That would allow the first week back to be focused on auto theft. If we have agreement to have extended hearings during that second week, I don't think any party would object to doing two hearings on auto theft the week after next. But if we don't have agreement around having extended hearings in that second week, then I think the first week will become more problematic.
If we're all working together to get this bill improved and through committee and back to the House, then I think we have a game plan: two meetings on auto theft the week after next, a deadline for amendments the following week, and then when we come back we will have extended hearings, including potentially an extra meeting on Tuesday night to allow us to work through the amendments.