Thank you, Mr. Fraser. I thought you were calling me out on relevance or something like that. I was ready to defend my position. This is extremely relevant to my subamendment. In any event, thank you for pointing out that Mr. Fragiskatos was disconnected momentarily.
I'll go back to this email. In the email there are the introductory paragraphs that go into detail about the proposals, and there is also the executive summary of both the programs, which was sent from Craig Kielburger or his executive assistant. This is fully there. I don't know why this wasn't the page Mr. Poilievre was waving around. This one had all the information in it. He could have stood there and waved this one around and pointed out how much information we're getting, but no, of course he didn't do that. Instead, he pulled one from the previous example I used, which had information blacked out that had nothing to do with the actual program.
I encourage anyone in the media or anybody else to go back and grab a screenshot or a still shot of the video of Mr. Poilievre doing that to see if they can see what's on that page. I can guarantee that this looks almost exactly like the page he had, and it's information that is completely irrelevant to the motion that was prepared by the committee.
Moving on to another document, I turn your attention, Mr. Chair, to pages 105 to 110 of the PCO release. A number of programs listed here are unrelated to the CSSG. They have nothing to do with the motion at hand, and the committee explicitly did not ask for them. As you'll see, these are the ones that, because they had no mention, were not disclosed.
The problem here, to understand where the issue comes from, is what happens when we talk about redacted documents. The Conservatives like to use this angle because it plays really well in the media. They like to say that these documents are redacted so heavily that they can't read them. Usually when the public is receiving this kind of narrative, we're talking about an intelligence briefing or something specific to a particular issue. It is an entire document, and stuff is being redacted from within it, but in this case, since the call for these documents ended up producing mass amounts of paper because so many programs were discussed, the way they redacted the programs that were not necessary was by completely blacking them out while still giving all the information. I know that when this eventually comes out in one form or another, the Conservatives are going to learn this and then fall flat on this argument, in this witch hunt for information that doesn't exist. That's what's going to end up happening.
It's unfortunate that they're putting us through this at this point, but my objective here is to protect the individuals and their credibility. These are the folks back in the parliamentary offices who went through the work of providing this information and redacting this stuff. I do this because they don't have the benefit of being able to defend themselves right now. Because the Conservatives don't want to afford them that opportunity, nor do the NDP and the Bloc apparently, I find it incumbent upon us to do that, so I'll continue with this and go through some more documents.