Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Given what we've heard since the beginning of the meeting, I want to point out that I agree with the Bloc Québécois member that this is a paramount bill, one that will have long-term consequences. The minister said he wanted the bill to be as flexible as possible. There's a difference, though, between the perception or the intention he expressed during his appearance on September 26 and what appears in the letter he sent us.
Here's where we differ with the Bloc Québécois: we believe the words matter. Not only does how they are written matter, but so, too, does how they are measured and given effect, by all the witnesses, as they relate to the bill as a whole. We obviously believe that the witnesses who appear before the committee throughout this process must be able to make a judgment, one based on words that clearly outline what the government is trying to achieve through the bill. We can't just wait for the clause-by-clause study, at the very end. We have a duty to provide all the witnesses who come before the committee with the proper text of the bill, so that they can make their own assessment and comment accordingly.
We have shown good faith, and I want to make clear that we have absolutely no intention of filibustering this committee. What we want is not to waste the time of the very important valuable witnesses who appear before us. As I said, we want to make sure the proper text of the bill is available to them. Hopefully, the government will share it with us. As my fellow member said earlier, we are working in good faith and want to put time into this.
The government could potentially put forward eight amendments. We want the first three so we can start the work. We are meeting with the Privacy Commissioner Thursday, but again, we don't have the amendments. That means we'll be asking him for his take on something he hasn't formally seen. That makes no sense.
I still believe that my fellow member is right. The Bloc Québécois is partly right, but we disagree on where to draw the line. As the member said privately earlier, the important thing is establishing a balance so that our work isn't for naught. The words in a bill that deals with privacy and artificial intelligence are fundamentally important, in our eyes. Let's face it, AI will be running our lives in 10, 15 or 20 years. That's why we need the proper text of the bill.