Whenever we ask the tough questions, we're maligned and criticized by them. Quite frankly, this is the role of the opposition. For those members I'm staring at right now, who may have the privilege of being re-elected in the next election—although I think the odds are slim to nil—they're going to have the ability to be an opposition MP. They're going to, obviously, change their mindset because they're going to want transparency and accountability from their government.
To go back to reflect on the original motion, amendment and subamendment, we're losing track of the evidence we have before you. I think it's important I talk about evidence because Ms. Khalid talked about evidence over politics or evidence versus politics. The questions we put to this committee in the filibuster—and this is exactly what it is. Ms. Damoff may be offended by that, but that's exactly what she has been doing, as well as her colleagues. We heard some evidence from the minister himself. We received evidence by way of media reports. That's not political. They may not like the message and the content, but that doesn't—