Mr. Angus, I am speaking. Thank you. I've been acknowledged by the chair.
This recommendation isn't a recommendation at all. How can we vote on something that is declared to be recommendation 2? It has no recommendation, it's simply a statement. Where you can include that is in the body of the report, presumably. Obviously this committee is forcing the government side to issue a dissenting report, which we presumably will, because we can't allow these kinds of unsubstantiated recommendations to move forward.
I'm looking at a statement in this so-called recommendation right at the end that says, “But this committee heard no reason to believe the allegations of Shaw and Vidéotron that CTF is poorly structured or operated”.
Essentially, we're calling Shaw and Vidéotron liars; they're the bad guys. Again, we're doing the same thing as we did in the first recommendation. We're trying to do a public shaming of the two parties we need at the table, who at all times stayed within the law, who actually raised an issue that was important to be raised, an issue that had been neglected for far too long, and now we're blaming them for doing that. If there's any shame, it should be on this committee for having suggested this kind of a recommendation.
Mr. Chair, on a point of order, I ask you to rule on whether this is a recommendation.