I'm looking forward to that, Mr. Chair.
Basically, I'm just looking at the motion. As we all know, the substance of the motion is what the committee actually orders for production. The preamble to this motion, first of all, goes into talking about food banks, which is completely irrelevant to the substance of the motion. The second point doesn't tell the full story of what the minister has already disclosed. For example, it doesn't mention his charitable donation of $1,500. On the third point, “The Prime Minister's Office has not clarified”—well, there's no obligation on them to actually clarify this.
To me, in order to avoid a lengthy debate about a preamble that really doesn't deal with the substance of the motion and that is unnecessary for the adoption of the substance of the motion, I would propose, Mr. Chair, an amendment to delete the preamble, meaning paragraphs (i), (ii) and (iii) of the motion. I think that will help us get to a better discussion of the actual substance of the motion so that we don't have to worry about the superfluous language that is somewhat slanted in one direction.
That would be my proposal, Mr. Chair.