Thank you, Chair.
I understand that we have a few new members joining us today, so I would like to put everything in context. I take Mr. Angus's point, and I'll be short.
Baylis Medical, a Quebec company that became a success story, was founded by immigrants coming to Canada who found an area they were passionate about and put their heart and soul into it. Baylis is the type of business that we should all be promoting. However, because Mr. Baylis chose to step up and represent his constituents from 2015 to 2019, he and his company are now being demonized.
If I read the mood of the committee right, the opposition members are going to assume guilt and drag them through the public square and try to demonize them. I don't think that's the right thing to do.
Colleagues know full well that contracts for ventilators, which is at the heart of Mr. Angus's reasoning for bringing this forward, was not with Baylis Medical at all but with another company, which did in fact later subcontract to Baylis. Now it's being suggested that we conduct a study that specifically targets this company. There is no proof of wrongdoing whatsoever, yet we are being asked to dedicate a considerable amount of time and resources into a review that simply has no merit.
There is currently no open investigation by the Ethics Commissioner or Privacy Commissioner or commissioner of lobbying into this matter. The primary contractor is public and was disclosed transparently.
In a pandemic, thousands of Canadian companies have been asked to step up and assist in the efforts to provide essential PPE and other emergency equipment to ensure that we have adequate resources to combat COVID-19. Baylis Medical, like many other companies, stepped up. It shouldn't be unfairly targeted because its chairman was a member of a government party previously. It's not as if he's a sitting member right now.
The truth is, Chair, if we go by the logic—and please, if opposition members are listening—we could easily start looking into the party affiliations of all other businesses and business owners who received government contracts.
I know I don't need to repeat the words of my colleagues on this side from the last meeting. I'm sure colleagues can recall many examples of Conservative-affiliated business owners who have donated to and supported the Conservative Party of Canada. However, that doesn't stop them from receiving contracts. If we went by that logic, that a business owner's political affiliation dictates whether or not they receive a government contract, then only a very small number of businesses would be innocent in their view. No small or medium-sized business in Canada would be eligible.
Chair, I can go on and on with point-by-point reasoning on all matters that relate to this motion. However, as I've already been speaking for some time now, I will leave colleagues and the public with just one final point.
We are now in the middle of a second wave of COVID-19. Much of Quebec is in red zones. Ontario similarly has several regions in a modified stage 2.
The city where I live, Toronto, has received multiple warning signs. I see businesses that are truly worried. Businesses in Toronto are facing enhanced restrictions.
There are similar actions being taken in every province in Canada as we try to contain and manage this second wave. Businesses throughout this country are struggling. They have barely recovered from the lockdown that helped us through the first wave of COVID-19. They're looking to government, Parliament and parliamentarians for support and a plan for recovery.
We already have the FINA committee seized with the matter of WE and exploring issues relating to the Canada student service grant. It's unclear if they are going to be able to meet their obligations under the standing order to conduct pre-budget consultations, which are so important. We simply cannot afford to have another committee stuck in gridlock. Colleagues can place the blame squarely at the feet of the government if they wish. However, I think it's clear to the public at large that it is the opposition that is completely wrapped up in this non-scandal. The more time we waste on this, the more Canadians are going to take note.
I will ask Mr. Angus and my colleagues if we could please work together to come up with a motion that is both fair—