Thank you, Madam Chair.
I'm not going to go to the wording of the motion just now, because I think there's maybe something that could make it a bit clearer, but I'll go to the overall thing.
The reason I put this forward and support it is that as was just mentioned, other committees did some reports immediately after the program was eliminated and of course there were some recommendations, but really there's not been a proper look at the impact on women. I think that's what we're discussing here, impacts such as the McIvor case and other cases that have affected women specifically.
The Official Languages Act is looking at a particular aspect of it, and to some degree I think there's also legislation that indicates something about the role they have to play there, but I think doing a quick study on the court challenges program shouldn't take us a great deal of time, especially since we're going to be dealing with women and justice as part of the gender-based study.
Because it's a project and a legislative piece unto itself, we could take it as a piece. Its ramifications are quite major. I was looking at the work plan; obviously it's challenging before Christmas, but each meeting is two hours. We could add a meeting or two at some point before Christmas to fit in the court challenges part, or certainly to start it, and then hopefully finish it once we get back. But I still think it's a piece that would help us a great deal, both in terms of what we're already doing in terms of gender-based study as well as in terms of the impact it's having on women in our country with respect to women's rights.
For that reason, I still think it's worthwhile to do.