With that, Mr. Chair, I certainly intend to get to the motion.
In terms of the motion that was made by Mr. Martin and the amendment that was made by Mr. Poilievre, I cannot help but be reminded of those who participate in a number of events. When you play hockey, you follow the referee's rules. When you play baseball, there are umpires who decide the rules of the game. In terms of listening to what the Conservative Party is doing here, we are, in effect, kicking sand in the face of the umpires who umpire our elections.
It's a great underestimation of the value of having a strong Elections Canada that is fair to all Canadians, and especially to us who are candidates in a given election. To criticize them, and to listen to Mr. Hiebert in terms of his five points.... Sometimes it only takes one point to show that somebody is creating a criminal act; it doesn't take five points to convict a criminal. But we are dealing with issues of the party in power, which is trying to undermine the effects and the reality of what Elections Canada has stood for since 1867.
May I conclude in terms of what I see? Mr. Hiebert is much younger than I, but if you look at the history of the United States of America, you'll find that a very minor offence like Watergate caused the downfall of an administration of the United States. I'm not sure if the Conservative Party, in their presentations yesterday and today, are trying to do the same thing through devious acts to continue to perpetuate a devious method of paying for our campaign elections that is contrary to the Elections Act, but I'd like to remind them that because of that break-in at Watergate, President Nixon put his whole career and the administration of the United States on the line.
Are we doing the same thing in terms of the Conservative Party of Canada? Are they putting everything on the line for the sake of a few thousand dollars?