Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Of course, I believe it's quite fortunate that the rights of members to speak are being upheld in this case by the chair and by the clerks. I certainly understand, as has been said, that I'm no longer capturing Mr. Bachrach's attention or offering him something that he feels is compelling, but it's not really my job to keep him entertained. My job is to speak to the bill.
As you said, there is a direct link, whether or not the government now regrets putting it in there, because we're now talking about it. Maybe they hoped that this would be breezed past or that Bill C-26 would be considered irrelevant, even though it's the title of the clause we are debating and even though it specifically refers to what will happen if Bill C-26 receives royal assent.
To somehow believe that it's irrelevant to be talking about a bill that is specifically named and specifically referred to as having an impact on this piece of legislation is truly unfortunate. I appreciate the chair recognizing the relevance of the discussion, despite the fact that Mr. Bachrach and some others clearly might not enjoy the conversation. I don't operate for Mr. Bachrach's enjoyment, entertainment, captivation or any of the other things he's talked about. I will continue to read from the relevant information about the relevant—