Okay, then. Thank you very much, Madame Freeman.
All in favour of Mr. Calandra's motion, which I previously read, please raise your hands.
All those opposed to Mr. Calandra's motion, please raise your hands.
The vote is five in favour and five opposed.
The chair will vote against the motion, and I'll give you my reasons. I've got three reasons.
One is that I've done this a lot when I chaired the public accounts committee, dealing with witnesses that sometimes were reluctant to come to the committee. I think I'm fair, but I'm firm. People are very busy. You have to give them a few options, but you have to make it very clear that they are coming and they're coming within a short period of time. Over the years I've had every excuse thrown at me for why they can't come.
The second issue is that in this case we did make a decision to try to have both Monsieur Lacroix and the Information Commissioner here, which I think is important.
Third, we are informed by the Office of the Information Commissioner that the office's report card will be tabled. CBC is mentioned. I hate to quote media reports for their authenticity, but if they're correct, there will be some negative comments in it. That report will be invaluable to the committee when we do have the hearing with the CBC, because there has obviously been an audit and research done on the various issues. As a result, we would not be dealing with a politically charged discussion; we would be dealing with an actual audit that's been done and with some empirical evidence as to their ability to meet the requirements of the Access to Information Act.
That said, the motion is defeated.
(Motion negatived)
Seeing nothing—
