Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'm hearing people talk about the motion Mr. Housefather put forward, and I think I could probably accept that, at the bare minimum, we have scratched the surface of meeting the terms of our motion. I accept Mr. Housefather's explanation of what can and can't be called a charter statement. I'm fine with that.
As we get back into clause-by-clause for this bill, which we're destined to do, I hope that everybody keeps in mind something Minister Lametti did in fact say in his statement—and I guess this is the crux of it for Conservatives and for me in particular—when he said that some limits to the charter freedom of expression may be justifiable. We know that the removal of 4.1...we've heard that it does actually implicate some limits to freedom of expression, and I don't think we've ever truly had, as Mr. Manly said, a healthy discussion specifically about 4.1 when it was removed.
I would hope that everybody goes away from this meeting and thinks very seriously about how much freedom of expression they are prepared to limit. This is an ambition to make sure that the government regulates what Canadians see online with some policy to try to promote what they deem as most “Canadian” versus what Canadians actually choose. To me, that's a fundamental question worth debating. How many limits? How much of our freedom of expression should we be prepared to give up to make sure that Canadians are forced to see what we have determined should be Canadians' first choice online?
I hope we have that discussion as we go forward because I don't think we have adequately had it.