Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I will go back to what I was speaking about before the votes began and will remind this committee that when this issue came to us for the first time, I said that we have a number of motions in front of this committee. We were in the middle of the women's study at the time, which I think should have taken precedence, but we stopped. We paused that study in order to address Mr. Desilets' original motion, which I believe was for one meeting. Am I correct that it was one meeting?
Then it became that we wanted to bring in Daoust and we wanted to bring in the minister. I addressed this committee back then and said that this felt like mission creep and that we were going to continue to dig and dig. This has now become a deep-sea fishing exercise, as far as I can tell.
This is not the proper way to debate these motions. We have amendments to this motion, which we have not had an opportunity to get to, because we're not dealing with this in committee business the way that it should be. We have committed to hosting a subcommittee meeting to be able to deal with this and to move forward properly. That's been rejected. This has been something that, clearly, the opposition wants to do in open committee so that they can make a spectacle of it.
We had a number of times when witnesses were interrupted, Mr. Chair, to the point that we had to, as was advised to us, take even more time to do sensitivity training on when we have witnesses who have lived experience in front of us. I think that was a very valuable experience, and I thank MP Blaney for suggesting we go through that. This happened at the last meeting. The witness even spoke to the disrespect she was shown, and it has happened again today with witnesses we did not get a chance to hear from.
There is a process for these motions. All the other motions we've done have been done through that process. The push-back they're seeing from us is a result of that process being broken and of the spectacle this is attempting to create.
With regard to the amendment in front of us, again, I'm not fundamentally against the amendment from Monsieur Desilets at all. I think this is just the wrong time and place to be doing these sorts of things. We absolutely need to reset this committee and get back to a subcommittee scenario so that we're dealing with these motions appropriately.
Mr. Chair, may I ask quickly, because I don't have it readily in front of me, how many motions we already have on the docket right now. Is it seven or eight?