Mr. Chairman, I would like to raise a procedural question. Since Ms. Picard is here before us this morning, I presume that her bill was refused by the subcommittee.
Would it not be usual practice for the committee to have the benefit of the subcommittee's report explaining to us, first, that Ms. Picard's bill had been rejected as being non-votable? Would we not normally expect to receive a report from the subcommittee explaining why the bill was deemed to be non-votable? In other words, I get the feeling that I am listening to Ms. Picard without knowing exactly why.