Thanks, Mr. Chair.
I'm not sure whether there's some confusion about who moved the motion, but it wasn't the official opposition. I keep hearing that the government members' argument is against the Conservatives. I'm a little confused by that. They're saying we're wasting time with the ArriveCAN study and bringing in the same witnesses. I would ask, which witnesses on ArriveCAN appeared at OGGO and then appeared at ETHI? Where has that happened? We haven't doubled up on those witnesses, but it certainly could be germane to do so.
The witness who was here today, having received.... CBSA said he got $8 million, one of the largest contracts awarded in a $54-million project. He said he got $100,000. I don't know whether people thought that was a waste of time. I think it's quite telling that CBSA thinks they spent $8 million and the vendor says they haven't billed them or received that much. That raises serious questions.
Ms. Saks was talking about Conservatives wasting time. We hadn't even intervened in this discussion. Frankly, however, it's quite an important issue. If there is concern that this is wasting time—that studying foreign interference in our elections is wasting time—I disagree. If Ms. Saks isn't comfortable working past 6:30 at night, get a substitute.
Mr. Chair, we're going to support this motion and we're prepared to debate it until the end of resources. Should the filibuster and wasting of time and resources by government members like Ms. Saks continue, we're prepared to continue this discussion in other meetings.
It is certainly disappointing when people look for disagreement when there wasn't any to begin with.