Pardon me, Mr. Chair.
I greatly respect and appreciate the effort put forward by Ms. Zann. I do note that adopting a motion without a timeline or a consequence would seem to me to be not as strong as the action the committee has already taken. I would suggest that we add a clear timeline underlining our expectation to receive the documents. If we don't receive the documents, we could have Mr. Stewart back here again, but that would seem to me at a certain point to be banging our heads against the wall. I think we need to report this matter to the House.
Although I completely disagree with Mr. Roy's interpretation of the law here, I got the impression from his comments that he might be more likely to advise compliance if the House ordered the production of the documents. My amendment says that if the documents are not provided, this matter will be referred to the House. Then it is up to the House to request the production of those documents, if they wish. That might carry more weight. I think many of the same issues apply, but that might carry more weight in the eyes of Mr. Roy and Mr. Stewart.
Rather than just repeating ourselves, we should position ourselves to respond if a repeat of the motion is not complied with, and hence, I think, the importance of the amendment.