Thank you, Madam Chair.
I'm certainly not questioning the importance of the subject raised by the Conservatives. I'm just seriously disappointed in my colleague Ms. Thomas's timing, in the context of a study that was originally scheduled to last four meetings and that I myself offered to shorten to three. It's a subject I feel very strongly about, and one that's important for the future of the media. There were 30 minutes left to hear from these quality witnesses. We could have continued to discuss things with them, and this motion could have been debated at a later date. This really isn't very nice.
That said, Madam Chair, on the substance of the motion, I agree. Given what we experienced with the Laith Marouf case, we must make sure that the recommendations we made following our study were followed. Everyone was aghast. We were all outraged at the way things unfolded, and we demanded changes through our recommendations. It would be entirely legitimate for us to hold the government to account and check whether the recommendations issued following the meetings on the Laith Marouf affair were followed.
Now, I want to talk about the fact that we're using an event like this, which isn't on the same scale. I'm not saying it's right; on the contrary, it's completely reprehensible. There's nothing good about giving money to an organization that uses anti-Semitic rhetoric and wants to start an intifada. It makes no sense to give public money to such organizations. However, we can discuss the path this money has taken.
As for the motion itself, I'm not convinced that the work has been done properly. I'd be willing to hear the Conservatives' arguments on that, but according to my research, the $600,000 and $569,353 we're talking about did not come from Canadian Heritage at all. So we're debating a motion that would have benefited from a little more research. However, I'm prepared to be corrected if someone can show me that this money did come from Canadian Heritage.
Now, I'm not sure what to do with the motion at this time. I don't know how urgent people feel this proposed study is. In my opinion, it would be more relevant for us to hear from representatives of the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council. They're the ones who should be reporting to us in the first place. Perhaps at a later date we will judge that the ministers responsible should indeed be convened. Will it be the Minister of Canadian Heritage , the Minister of Industry or the Minister of Diversity? In short, I think we're giving a high priority to something that deserves more nuance.
I'll stop here for now. I'm curious to hear what my colleagues have to say about this, but it would be worth checking the facts and rewording the motion. For example, we need to check whether the amounts in question, which total just over $1.1 million, actually came from Canadian Heritage or the Department of Innovation, Science and Economic Development. I'd be very interested to...