The motion to limit can be debated, and Mr. Laframboise, I believe you at your word, but I haven't heard from every other member across the table that they're not going to filibuster this, or indeed that a substitute won't come in to filibuster this. I'm suggesting that we put a limit on it, only because there's no need not to.
If indeed we have an agreement, c'est la vie,c'est parfait. But if we don't have an agreement, we'll be in the same position we are right now, at this very moment, except that it will be five days later and Canada Post could have taken enforcement action against them. That is the worry we have. We are only asking for a stay of execution, a stay of enforcement, so that the Canadians in Toronto, in Montreal, and in Vancouver can keep their job and know where their bread is going to come from in the next month or two months, and that Canada Post will not take enforcement proceedings against them. That is what we are asking.
We want the debate to come to an end at some time. Whatever that time period may be, we believe it would be fair to come to an end, just an end date. I believe you at your word, Mr. Laframboise, but we need some sort of limit or we might as well just continue now. And let's be frank, nobody wants to. Nobody wants to continue, but we indeed need some sort of time period to end this or else we'll be in exactly the same position on Wednesday as we are right now, except that in the meantime we will have taken apart all the committee business that is relevant to the needs of Canadians, such as rail safety.