Thanks, Mr. Easter. That wasn't really a point of order. But the point I wanted to make was that the money went to the wrong place, and Mr. Easter just admitted it. It's a wonderful program. But the money went to the wrong people, to the wrong portion of the beef sector. This motion may very well repeat the same error, and that's my concern with it.
The motion that I put forward encourages the government to work with industry to find solutions to existing irritants. Clearly, the SRM is an irritant. We know that. But we have no call to jump up and claim we have a solution that we're ready to report to the House. We've listened to only one set of witnesses. When the Liberals were the government, their money went to the wrong people. So I don't think they're on solid ground when it comes to talking about how best to serve the agricultural sector or the beef sector.
That's my concern with debating this motion again—we've already discussed it and tabled it as a committee. It came to a vote. The majority of MPs decided to table the motion, which means to put it aside. We're no longer going to discuss it, at least not right now. We have other things to do.
I mentioned one of them earlier in this meeting—we need to review our report. But the opposition is very bullheaded in this matter. Whatever we say or however we appeal to them, they're a unified block. They spoke earlier about democracy, yet they want to limit debate on the motions. That's what they were proposing; I think Mr. Eyking was proposing this. I think we should leave this motion off to the side and move ahead with our report.