Now, is it worthwhile to understand something about the Perimeter Institute? As individuals, yes. Is it the right thing for us to be studying as a committee, when it appears to be here only for the chance to further the debate what happened in the House? I don't think so, Mr. Chairman.
For example, are we advancing the knowledge of most Canadians about the Perimeter Institute by being here and holding this meeting? Well, by the interest from the media, as I see it, there's no indication that it's the case we're advancing that. Are we advancing the cause of accountability of government? We weren't able to have a minister here on the estimates, for example, and yet we have a minister here carrying on a debate from question period that ought to have been left behind, frankly, left to the House, as a question of honour or whatever you want to call it—leave it to the House.
Mr. Chairman, I simply want to say that I support the institution and I'm prepared to leave the rest of my time to my opposition colleagues to use as they see fit. I just don't see the point in carrying on with this kind of conversation.