I might need your undivided attention on this one, committee members, so that we have a full understanding of it.
On April 30, Mr. Fast moved that the consideration of his motion be moved to Wednesday, May 2. At that time, Mr. Bélanger amended this by replacing the words “to the meeting on Wednesday, May 2” with the words “until such time as the Minister has come forward with his report on the matter of remailers”.
Because the timeframe has moved past May 2, it makes both Mr. Fast's motion and Mr. Bélanger's amendment moot.
If you're interested, what you can do is make—Would it be an amendment to the motion? It would be a dilatory motion with the same words.
Basically the time has moved past the dates that were set out and established by the motion and the amendment; therefore the motion and the amendment are no longer valid.
Mr. Bélanger.