Ms. Church, can I intervene for a second?
Again, like all of us, I've sat here for 14 hours. My expectation as chair is that we are not inviting Mr. Imbleau to specifically talk about the merits of the Alto system. As I've mentioned a couple of times, there are varying opinions on that around this table. Some members clearly support it, and some members clearly do not. I think the fundamental issue that we're dealing with here is the finance minister's claims that he did create an ethics screen.
In my opinion, and I think I'm hearing this from other members, the value that Mr. Imbleau can provide is whether, in fact, notwithstanding this ethics screen that was applied, there were discussions between the finance minister and perhaps Mr. Imbleau as it related to the screen, as it related to decisions with respect to Alto, funding, financing and all of this stuff. Everything that the finance minister has said he recused himself from, in my opinion, Mr. Imbleau has some value to add to that discussion of what this motion is calling for.
I want to make it clear that this is not about Alto and the value and the merits of the system for having Mr. Imbleau here. I think he has a lot to add to this discussion. I just wanted to intervene to make that point, Ms. Church. At least from the perspective that I have been sitting here for 14 hours listening intently to all of the arguments that are being made. I think both the Conservatives and the Bloc have indicated that this has nothing to do with the system itself. They may not agree with it, and that's fine. This is all about the finance minister and the ethics screen and how it was applied or wasn't applied.