Well, okay, then let me put on the record the following, Mr. Chairman, because a new word has been introduced. I hadn't had it as part of my thesaurus collection. It's the word “redundant”. But it was used en français. What it meant was that we're beginning to see the word used often enough that it's beginning to seep in, it's beginning to be integrated, and therefore it's no longer needed.
This is the reason that this particular amendment has been reintroduced. It's exactly the same vocabulary in exactly the same order, both
In both French and English, it is the same thing. If the amendment is the same and we allow the same thing, we can give it consideration that would lead to the same answers. That is obvious!
It's evident that there's no redundancy. If there is no redundancy in the chicanery associated with bringing back an amendment that the government already withdrew because they knew it was wrong, then surely to reflect on the reasons that this xeroxed copy of an amendment would not be eliciting members' reflections--