Finance committee  I want to keep it brief, because there's not a need to go on and on at this point. I do believe that there seems to be some support on the other side for wanting to see them complete their work, but I hope there's an understanding of why the urgency is there. I will make it clear that the timeline being proposed, although there has been some push-back on it, certainly is within the time we have.

Finance committee  Correct. That is what's happened. The motion indicated that the committee should complete its work and have recommendations by December 8. With the timeline they're currently on, that will not happen. They've refused to consider a new timeline to enable that. There's really no reason they can't do that.

Finance committee  Yes. I do want a recorded vote, but I have a point of order after that. (Amendment negatived: nays 5; yeas 4 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

Finance committee  I have a point of order. Given that we have now had the motion defeated, much of the rationale that was provided by the government members for opposing it was that HUMA was currently undertaking a study of the topic at hand. As I had indicated earlier, HUMA is refusing to follow the timeline that it was supposed to follow, which would not allow for this to be brought back to the House and considered by the government in time for anything to be done before the next election.

Finance committee  Given that, Mr. Chair, could I move a motion that we request the committee on human resources, skills and social development to complete its report and present it to the House prior to the Christmas recess?

Finance committee  Yes, that's understood. It would be something in the order of that our committee ask the standing committee on human resources, skills and social development—and I'll let you fill in the rest of the name—to complete their report, and that it be tabled by the chair in the House by December 13, prior to the Christmas recess.

Finance committee  You're talking about the amendment that was just defeated?

Finance committee  Thank you, Mr. Chair. I appreciate that advice.

Finance committee  I want some clarification, then. Would tabling a motion on what we're currently discussing have the effect of tabling it until someone brings it forward again? How would that be brought forward again? I guess that's the question, right?

Finance committee  I guess that's not really the question I was asking. The question I'm asking is, if there's a tabling motion on what we're currently discussing, to move to that, what enables it to be brought forward for discussion again? How is that triggered?

Finance committee  I'll try.

Finance committee  Mr. Chair, before you move to get a ruling on that from your clerk, I'll say that this isn't actually what's under discussion at the committee.

Finance committee  They are simply having a study of loss, right? This is not actually directly what they're....

Finance committee  The suggestion that's being made is that we would table the discussion on the amendment, which would then allow Mr. Julian to bring forward his motion. If there were unanimous consent for that to happen, what would be required in order to bring the discussion on the amendment forward again?

Finance committee  The third element to that then, regardless of the outcome of seeking that unanimous consent by Mr. Julian, is how the amendment would be brought back. That's what I'm trying to get at here. Would I need unanimous consent to do that as well?