Mr. Chairman, can a motion written in what I would call rotten French be in order? This is absolutely incomprehensible in French; it makes no sense. The interpreter has just read it, and it's worse to hear it than it is to read it. “[...] le gouvernement [...] de garantir que les agriculteurs Canadiens ne seront pas sellés [...]”. What does that mean? “[...] un impôt de carbone [...]” What does that mean? “[...] leurs coûts d'entrée [...]” What does that mean? Nothing makes sense in this motion.
I have a lot of other comments to make, but we have important witnesses to hear. The way it is written is absolutely unacceptable. It shouldn't be introduced before the committee.
And what type of carbon tax is the parliamentary secretary talking about? Is his government hiding something in its books and is it preparing to present us with a carbon tax? Is it talking about what the leader of the opposition didn't really present officially? Who's telling us that costs will increase? Does it know things that we don't know? All this is hypothetical and makes no sense.
Let's reject this as fast as possible. Let's get rid of it.