I have a question for Mr. Fatah.
I listened to your interventions very attentively. Part of your intervention seems to be about the whole generation of motion M-103 and how it was an ill-conceived idea to even embark upon the study, particularly the study of Islamophobia.
One of the critiques we heard at length in Parliament at the time of the passage of the motion, and the critique that I think you're echoing today, is how it somehow stifles people's legitimate criticism about the tenets of their religion.
While I would admit that I disagree with virtually everything you've said in your opening discourse and response to questions, I defend your right to say it. That's something that's protected under our Constitution, under section 2(b), which I've litigated as a constitutional lawyer.
I have a simple question. Isn't your presence here today proof in and of itself that we are embarking upon a study that is promoting discussion about all forms of racism and discrimination, including Islamophobia, as opposed to stifling it?