Thank you, Chair.
As I said, I take this very seriously. There is no game being played here. The concerns are that the questions are not being answered. If you want, I will point to something on the record. Back in 2003, an investigation was done by this committee, when Mr. Chris Warkentin said:
It's unfortunate, Mr. Chair, that my colleague has undertaken to bring this forward now, simply because we do have important witnesses we should be hearing from. I do apologize on behalf of this side of the table for dismissing our previous witnesses much earlier. Obviously, they have important subject material that didn't get covered because of the choice of Mr. Andrews not to wait until committee business later on in the meeting.
Having said that, this is before committee now, and we'll have to undertake to review this.
You know, Mr. Chair, the Ethics Commissioner is currently reviewing the circumstances and the submission that has been brought forward. We also know that the Senate ethics commissioner is reviewing this. We also know that the Prime Minister has answered the questions in regard to this, and has said he knew nothing of it.
I can go on and on. I can read more if you want me to. It's just to prove a point that the accusation coming from the opposition members, especially from the Conservative members, that we are trying to stall this unveiling of documents or secrets, that we are trying to cover it up.... Just a few years ago, they were making the same argument, that a parallel investigation is taking place and there is no need for the committee to do the investigation. I wasn't there, but many members were. You will remember this; you debated it at this very committee. What's the difference? Why are you taking such a different position now and arguing that there is a need for a parallel investigation?
It's pretty relevant to what we are talking about today. That's another question. I see Mr. Barrett is super happy about this, and I look forward to hearing his answer. That's another question I put forward with regard to this motion. I was elected by constituents to ask questions. I won't vote blindly. I need to be convinced that there is a need for a parallel investigation, and I need to be convinced that you will not run the risk of contaminating the current investigation by the Ethics Commissioner. Again, there is an investigation happening right now.
Also, why take away all the safeguards of the privacy of these documents and broaden access as to who may see these documents? I think there are legitimate concerns, and I have not heard in the last week, including today, how they are being looked after.
With that, I'll pause my speech and I look forward to contributing at a later opportunity.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.