Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I will not repeat everything said by my committee colleagues, but I completely agree with them.
I was reading the letter from the Kielburgers' lawyer, and I thought it was a bit unseemly. As a lawyer, I am not sure I would have written that letter. In any case, I would not have written it like that. I can understand that he does not want his clients to testify, but I mostly think it is an announcement that someone will act in contempt of Parliament. I think that is unacceptable.
Of course, I fully agree that what happened in the WE Charity business with the Prime Minister merits further consideration. It is scandalous. This has been said over and over since last summer in all committees. I still agree with it.
Beyond that whole substantive issue, we cannot tolerate someone telling us in advance that they scoff at Parliament's orders. That is unacceptable. There is a process for opposing a summons if a person thinks it is invalid. They can request that the summons be suspended. There is legal recourse for that, but they certainly cannot say that they do not intend to obey and that they don't care. That is unacceptable.
If we tolerate this, I don't know where things will go, but I will be a bit embarrassed. I think we must react. In any case, the Kielburgers would benefit from coming to explain themselves, if only to correct what has been said, as the accusations that have been made are serious. I am thinking of all the witnesses, the CBC article I was reading this morning and the Fifth Estate report from about two weeks ago. All that is serious. Reed Cowen's testimony contains serious accusations. If I was one of the Kielburgers, I would want to explain myself and clear my name. I cannot understand them hiding as they are.
Beyond this, as parliamentarians, we have the responsibility to say to all Canadians that, when they receive a summons, that is an order that must be obeyed. If they don't agree, there is a process for asking that the summons be quashed, but they cannot just shirk their obligations.
For those reasons, I intend to support the motion, as well as Mr. Angus's amendment, which I have no problem with. An appearance must take place without delay, be it this week or next week, and the message must be clear.
Thank you.