Madam Speaker, my question is for the parliamentary secretary to the minister, who says he is not opposed to amendments.
Can he tell me why his government chose not to send this bill to committee before second reading?
The committee would have had more latitude to hear witnesses and amend and shape the bill to reflect their legitimate claims. When a committee receives a bill after second reading, it is set in stone a bit more, because it is approved in principle, which restricts the kind of amendments that can be made to it.
Why did his government choose not to send this bill to committee before second reading?