Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I think Mr. Fortin stated things quite accurately.
I just want to take this opportunity to say that I would like to see our committee move forward, so I appreciate Mr. Fergus' attempt, but I think, as Mr. Fortin said, it really doesn't reflect the reality. I think he was quite accurate in his original motion, Mr. Chair.
I'd just like to say that I'm getting a little frustrated because I'm seeing this filibuster more as a procedural tactic to avoid accountability and continue a cover-up on the WE scandal. We're seeing it at PROC. We're seeing it at the national defence committee with the sexual assault issues. We do know that the Liberals would like to engineer an election. On the sexual assault issue, for example, they knew in 2018 before the last election that this was going on, but they hid it from Canadians. It makes you ask what else they are hiding.
I come from Oshawa. Before the last election the auto sector was extremely important, and it still is very important to us. The government negotiated a CUSMA deal, and they said it was a better deal for the automotive sector. We found out from Global Affairs and other reports that it was actually a hit of $1.5 billion to the auto sector. My big concern here is that we have to be accurate. The Liberals want to do everything they can so that we don't talk about their scandals, but we have to be accurate.
The House of Commons directed us to do this. Our colleagues deserve the right to have a response in the House of Commons. For that reason, unfortunately, Mr. Chair, I won't be able to support Mr. Fergus' amendment, but I do appreciate the attempt.
I will cede to my next colleague to discuss this. I don't want to dwell too long on it.