In response, I think you did say that the motion was in order. Under the Standing Orders of the House of Commons, this committee does have jurisdiction over both the Minister of Finance and the Minister of National Revenue. That's clear in the standing orders.
As I said, if there are concerns about the specificity of the motion, I'm more than happy, of course, to expand it to simply ask the minister to appear and explain these issues of public concern. Canadians have an interest in the accountability of the minister for the actions of the agency.
I'm particularly concerned, as I said in the motion, about the expenditure of money to go after these charities. There are so many other topics I would like to invite the minister to come to talk about, such as tax havens and corruption in the Montreal CRA office. I'm happy to broaden the motion, but it occurred to me that because there is a specific item in the estimates, the appropriation of this money, this $6.3 million for this very purpose, I thought it would be more helpful to be specific than to be general.
Under Standing Order 108(2) this standing committee can request a report on any matter, and I would request that the minister assist us on that study. I'd like to study this issue in detail. If it's not technically appropriate for reasons of precedent to do this as a matter of the supplementary estimates (C), it is still appropriate for us to do it. This is the committee where the minister is to be held to account for actions and expenditures within that agency, so it seemed to me this was the appropriate place to bring forward those concerns.