You'd think I would have learned my lesson with PROC.
Frankly, I share Rachel's concern regarding the “without amendment” aspect of this motion. I believe there are some significant issues that we still need to deal with.
We have, as Rachel said, the parliamentary budget office report on the backlog. There's a lot of new information in there. I'm not in disagreement with moving on that report and the backlog situation, but the process is that we go to the subcommittee. That, in effect, sets course and direction for this committee.
My concern is that with respect to the family caregiver question, the efficacy of service dogs and...what was the other one? There were four specific things, and there's a new session. There's more information. We've had the supplementary estimates, for example, that have been tabled in the House of Commons. We haven't dealt with that issue. That doesn't reflect what's in Mr. Casey's motion. There's an order of the House on April 20 for committees to look into this and report back by November 27.
I'm not going to support this motion as is. The Conservatives will not support this motion as is. I think we need to go through the process, have the subcommittee provide direction and then have the clerk work on whatever comes out of that subcommittee at that time, Mr. Chair.