Okay.
Mr. Chair, I would say this. I think it's important to be on the record before any Conservative fundraising campaigns go up talking about a cover-up. This is a conversation that we had at this committee. Many of you will recall that it was the will of this committee to wait until further investigations happened prior to revisiting this.
I'm just going to say this, Mr. Chair. Part of the process that we've been witnessing as a tactic is to have every committee run parallel studies—six, seven, eight, nine, 10 meetings at a time—jamming up our studies. I know that Mr. Villemure has a study that is supposed to happen on our return.
I'm interested in this, Mr. Chair. I want to be on the record so that people can see quite clearly that if this whistle-blower has real merit to the things they're saying around a potential breach of our parliamentary privilege by having a minister, as the allegation says, allegedly lie to this committee, that is a significant thing. That is no small thing. I want to make sure that we give it the seriousness and attention that this type of allegation would require.
What I'm troubled with is that it's 6:30 p.m., 10 or 15 minutes after our meeting was supposed to be done, and we're now involved in a debate on this. I don't want to be rushed into a decision on this very serious allegation that's been made without having had the opportunity to review the materials as presented in the news or without having had the opportunity to hear any type of debate. I am uncomfortable voting on this motion.
Now, I'll just state this for the record: I will abstain from voting on this motion if it moves forward in its current form, as it is. I wanted to put that to the committee, because I'm not present there today. I'm not in the room. I can't have conversations with people, and I prefer to negotiate in an open and transparent way. That's where I stand on this.
Thank you.