It's a motion that is quite serious in its tone and the consequences--having to call the minister before the committee because of the nature of a response to a report. Once again, in this last case the committee expended tremendous time and energy on a report that was pretty much consensual in all of its recommendations.
I guess after Mr. Marleau took the time to count the number of words in our report...the 1,005-word response that came from the minister. Actually, the last time I think it was half that number. The only difference from the previous letter is that I think he added extra words, but unfortunately it's just as dismissive in nature as his previous letter.
Consequently I'll be supporting...and I'd almost be tempted to add an extra word in there and say “dismissive” letter, because it's quite dismissive of the work we've done here.