Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
I'll say just a couple of points to Mr. Bellavance, who I have great respect for. You know, I think if he looks back to the blues of November 19, I believe, he'll see how he and the other members of the opposition participated in a filibuster of their own motions for two hours before they then voted for them. So let's not pretend the games are being played on one side or the other. We genuinely disagree with some motions. You genuinely disagree with some motions.
But the one thing I do take umbrage at is this constant talk about democracy. The only time you guys ever talk about democracy and abiding democracy is when you've got six members sitting on your side, and the only time you complained about our forcing the majority on you is when we have six on this side. So the games are being played all over the place, Mr. Bellavance.
At the end of the day, I actually disagree with the motion Mr. Lemieux has put forward. I disagree with it on a couple of fronts. One, I believe it's against the member's privilege to not allow him to bring motions forward in committee. I believe it is a privilege we all have extended to us through the House of Commons that we should be allowed to bring motions forward. I believe members should be responsible with their motions and not use them in a dilatory manner, which sometimes I believe happens—mostly from the other side, but nonetheless.
Two, I believe the committee has already genuinely set the direction in which it wants to move. The committee has said we want to move in the direction of the report. We want to get the report out of the way. We've said that for a year now. I don't know what it is about the report that the opposition is filibustering. They're adding amendments; they're basically redrafting the report. They're delaying; there are five or six opposition motions in the queue to delay. Now today we're trying to work on the report, and they then go and hijack the agenda of the meeting, move it to committee business by a vote, which I did not agree with, and move towards getting all these motions out of the way. And they know it's going to take an entire meeting, if not two meetings, before we can get back to the report.
So I don't know what it is about competition in the agriculture sector that the opposition is opposed to reviewing, but it is clear that the committee has already set the agenda for where we want to go. That's why I disagree with Mr. Lemieux's motion, because it has already been stated. We have stated it not only once but twice. I mean, we've already passed a motion very similar to this. And I will get into my disagreements with André's motion if and when André brings his motion up. But at the end of the day, committee members are using their own individual freedoms as members of Parliament to hijack the agenda of the committee, the agenda that has already been put forward by the entire committee stating the direction we want to go. I could do what Wayne loves and quote out of the new O'Brien and Bosc as well as Robert's Rules of Order as to how this is out of order, but I'm not going to.
At the end of the day, I really do believe we have a job to do, and that is to move forward on this report as expeditiously as possible and to get something done on the report. I wish we saw some good faith on the other side, either by dropping some of their amendments they're continuing to bring forward, or, if we agreed to deal with one motion, by allowing us to move on—