Thank you, Mr. Fragiskatos.
There do seem to be a considerable number of calls for relevance. We are debating the subamendment by Mr. Gerretsen to the amendment by Pat Kelly to the motion by Mr. Poilievre.
I'm going to read the subamendment so people can keep it in mind:
That the committee requests the complete package of documents provided to the Office of the Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel to the House of Commons by relevant Deputy Ministers or the signatories of the transmittal letters, as well as the final package of documents that the Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel of the House of Commons approved for release, that both of the document packages be provided to the Committee no later than October 19, 2020,—
We're past that date now.
—and that after the committee reviews the two different versions of documents, the committee invite each of the relevant Deputy Ministers or the signatories of the transmittal letters, as well as the Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel of the House of Commons, to give testimony regarding the redactions applied to the documents that were requested and granted in the motion adopted on July 7, 2020, and that until such a time as this testimony is complete, debate on the main motion and amendment from Pierre Poilievre be suspended and that the Chair be authorized to schedule these witnesses, and convene a meeting to resume debate on Pierre Poilievre's motion once these meetings have taken place.
That's the subamendment that we have to be relevant to.
I have on my list Ms. Koutrakis followed by Mr. Longfield.
Do you want to be on the list or do you have a point to raise, Mr. Julian? I'm not hearing you.