Yes, Chair, just on the comments of my colleague Mr. Cooper, methinks he doth protest too much. Yes indeed, so we're going for the Shakespeare references, because when we look at the amendment that is being proposed, it in no way.... The amendment proposes to delete the reference “claiming to have attended a rally held by the Leader of the Official Opposition, Pierre Poilievre, on July 31, 2024”, but if you look at the entire sentence, deleting that example—and it is an example, and one that I would agree is egregious to anybody who is ethically conducting their political business—removes the context of the sentence.
We can look at that part (a): “The devastating impact of malicious, artificially generated online bots used by foreign and domestic actors. This includes Russia's propaganda machine, to manipulate public discourse, and fake bot accounts”. I take it there's a period somewhere in there maybe, but there's no context there. We could include other examples, but if I were on the other side, which I once was some 20 years ago—but we'll get into that another time—I would be very much concerned about clearing the names of those political organizers who indeed were directly affected by these fake bot accounts.
I am against deleting the remainder of that sentence because I think that example gives a very clear context, Chair.