Thank you.
Mr. Majumdar suggested that there's a “cloud of uncertainty” and conflicts. I would suggest that's not true. In fact, there is just a flurry of allegations. If you look at this study, the original purpose of it was principled. It's to review the Conflict of Interest Act, including the conflict of interest rules. That's a noble, principled approach to what we should be doing as members of Parliament.
However, the reference from the House of Commons amending it suggests that it include a consideration based on the unprecedented extent of the Prime Minister's corporate shareholders' interests. I'm not sure what the word “unprecedented” adds to that. If you're talking about a Prime Minister who has had success...I don't understand.
I'm suggesting to you, and I would like to know if you agree or not, that this is purely a political exercise. We should be reviewing in this committee the Conflict of Interest Act, not trying to fire off random questions about the Prime Minister or any other member of Parliament in the hope of scoring some political points, which have not been made.
Would you agree with that?