I can't support the motion until I read it in French. I heard the interpretation, and it seems fine to me. However, these are subtle and significant points. I'm not disagreeing outright, but I'd like to see the written version of the motion.
I want to remind you that we didn't ask that the tender be suspended to undermine the Public Health Agency of Canada, of course. We asked that the tender be suspended until we can confirm some information. We don't want to confirm the agency's stated purpose, which is to protect Canadians from COVID‑19. Of course, I agree with that purpose.
However, I find the data collection process unclear, non‑transparent, or at least incomplete. This morning, the data obtained by the parliamentary secretary arrived at the last minute. We didn't have time to study it properly. Nevertheless, I repeat that the purpose of the amendment isn't to undermine the agency, but to shed light on a significant issue.
In addition, after the last meeting, it was noted that the tender had been postponed to February 2. It has now been pushed back to February 4, the day after Mr. Duclos' appearance. I don't know whether it's a coincidence, but since we started speaking, the deadline for the tender has changed a few times.
I don't see any harm. However, I want to make sure that we have the opportunity to shed light on this and to get our report and recommendations to the House as soon as possible.
I'm bothered by the fact that the motion read out referred to reporting to the House. However, I didn't hear anything about recommendations, at least in the French version. That's why I want to read the motion in French. I want to be sure of the vote's purpose. This isn't about filibustering in any way, but rather about shedding light on the issue.