Mr. Chairman, allow me to refresh the committee's memory.
I'm going to cite Mr. McAvity in relation to Mr. Abbott's motion. At the meeting of June 20, 2006, Mr. Malo spoke to Mr. McAvity in the following terms:
As you know, the previous government initiated a review of the museum policy. I imagine you had an opportunity to make some recommendations to that government.
Mr. McAvity then answered that he had conducted broad consultations and developed proposals and that:
The museum policy was very close to fruition when the election was called. Unfortunately, it was unable to move forward to that point, but literally, consultations were finished and it was ready for a decision.
I agree with Mr. Bélanger on this subject.
At the November 8 meeting, Mr. Vadeboncoeur, of the SMQ, was asked whether a new consultation could lead anywhere. He answered as follows:
We're repeat to you exactly what we said during the other consultations that were held 2, 3, 4 even 10 years ago. It's as simple as that. The situation hasn't changed.
In the same line of thinking, Mr. Gerry Osmond from the Alberta museum community, told us the following:
To put it in layman's terms, we've been there and done that. You will not hear anything different on consultations any more. We would have been very clear in the last consultation, and delaying this process any further will not give you any new information.
That's why I'm introducing this motion. As regards that of Mr. Angus, one of our major concerns is to review the mandate of Radio-Canada to evaluate the resources that are allocated to it to carry out that mandate. I therefore suggest that we not waste a lot of time on museum policy. Ultimately, it might be harmful to do so, because the words and intentions are clear. Wasting time discussing them further would probably be an attempt to stall for time, to waste the committee's time and eventually to undermine the good faith that our party is showing.