Thank you so much.
I was hoping that members might want to see if this was a proper scope for an amendment. Is it proper to limit the issues that we want to talk about here specifically with respect to Roxham Road?
There was one other thing that really struck me in the letter, which kind of speaks to this amendment also, and that is the indication, for some reason, that the gentleman who is involved, Monsieur Pierre Guay, is “a businessman known for his donations to the Liberal Party”. I found that to be a little strangely placed within the letter. I'm sure Monsieur Villemure, as he was drafting his letter, would have known that Monsieur Pierre Guay was also a donor to the Conservative Party.
Again, within the scope, we're talking about transparency and trust in public institutions. We're talking about how we narrow that and study the issues that matter, and I think the way this letter outlines it really shows that we're indeed not focused on the right issues. By virtue of continuing to say again and again that this is eroding the public trust or there's no trust in government institutions, I think the opposition members are doing that part of eroding the trust themselves.
Again, I go back to my initial point, which is to say look, folks, we want to play ball. We want to make sure what we're doing is effective as a government, that the way we do it is open and transparent, and that we are continuing to provide not only the support that Canadians need but also the principles and the importance of providing the humanitarian support as needed. We need to do this without scapegoating and without calling into light people who may then not want to play ball in the future, or who may be scared off and say, “Oh no, should anybody engage with government or political parties or what have you, now, all of a sudden, they're going to get targeted.” That is not a precedent we should be setting here.
I think the way to move forward is through my amendment to limit the scope of what we are studying. Having the Minister of Public Safety and having the RCMP and the other officials as listed in the motion would keep the scope to the issue that is in front of us right now. I'm hoping I can get the support of members opposite for my amendment.