Thanks so much, Mr. Chair.
I just want to say that the impression one can get if one's listening to this filibuster is that the minister has been invited to the finance committee a number of times and that she hasn't appeared.
The minister has appeared at this committee at least four times during this Parliament. She has come here for every BIA as well as other key government legislation, and the clerk started this meeting by indicating to us that she is on record indicating that she will appear before us on May 16. She didn't indicate for how long, but she's never been here for less than an hour, so I should think that that's important to state.
I'd also like to state that it doesn't matter which committee you're on; it is very typical for ministers to be invited a number of times and quite often. It is not typical for ministers to accept every single invitation, but I don't want anyone to think that the minister has not appeared before this committee, that she has not appeared a number of times before this committee. She has. She has appeared before every important legislation—sorry, I want to say all legislation is important—but she has attended for every BIA and other important government legislation.
I also want to reiterate that we do agree with the amendment by MP Daniel Blaikie:
That the Minister of Finance be invited to be here for two hours on the bill and that this appearance be scheduled on or before May 18th, 2023.
We very much agree with that, and again, as I mentioned, we don't know how long the minister will stay, but we know that she has never been here for less than one hour. In fact, I have been here, Mr. Chair, at this committee when she has spoken for more than an hour. She has been here for more than an hour.
I also want to address Mr. Morantz's claim that he is being muzzled with our points of order. I don't think that we're trying to muzzle him or anybody else in any way.
We've heard quite a long speech around eels for many hours, which has absolutely no relevance to the BIA or to the federal budget 2023. We want to make sure that we keep the arguments on point and to the subamendment, the amendment, the BIA or federal budget 2023.
The last thing I want to reiterate is because, again, Mr. Morantz keeps on talking about how there's a whole slew of things in the BIA that have no relevance to federal budget 2023. I want to state one more time for the record that every measure in the BIA appears in the text of federal budget 2023, so they are absolutely relevant. We are not just putting things in there. I don't want Canadians to think that we're trying to fool them in any way. I think that we are trying to be accountable. Part of the reason we want to send it to various committees of key subject matter experts is to make sure that subject matter experts are on it and that they give feedback to this committee.
With that, I also would like to state that we do not support that subamendment, and I'm really hoping that we can move on and get back to hearing from witnesses on the BIA, then hear from our Minister of Finance and move forward with federal budget 2023.
Thank you.