Mr. Chair, this is unbelievable. We have less than an hour to ask Mr. Therrien questions. In the past, we have had at least two hours at our disposal, and we could hear from witnesses. We are far from that today. However, Mr. Therrien is probably the person who will change or renew statutes on privacy for future generations. In that context, this situation is totally unacceptable.
The official opposition wanted to do its work. We knew that the Conservatives would get what they wanted, but we still wanted to do our work thoroughly and hold at least four meetings to consider your nomination. We would have liked to hear experts' testimony and to learn from previous commissioners about the major challenges attached to the renewal of this country's privacy legislation.
However, we were denied that opportunity. After less than an hour reserved for questions, we are being pressured into approving or disapproving your candidacy. In my opinion, Canadians are the ones who lose out in such a situation. This government's track record in terms of accountability and transparency is pathetic, as evidenced by this process.
We all have the right to be a little frustrated by this state of the affairs. You are clearly not to blame, Mr. Therrien. In a way, I sympathize with you, as you are forced to participate in a sham appointment process. Nothing like this has probably been seen in Canadian history. In my opinion, my colleague Mr. Cotler did a good job of pointing this out. As parliamentarians, we must be thorough and do our job.
It is clear that my government colleagues don't feel like putting in the work and are making a mockery of the process that should be followed for such an important appointment.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.