Thank you, Mr. MacAulay.
I am quite unsure about this motion. At first glance, I have many reservations. Unless Mr. Stoffer has specific information that he would like to share with us, I have the impression that if we were to invite the commissioner to speak to us about what happened... In a few days, we will be experiencing a very sad anniversary. I am more inclined to invite the commissioner to give us further information on the investigation into the Acadian II.
Unless Mr. Stoffer is in possession of some information that I do not have, I think we can perhaps get the same kind of information by asking the commissioner to write us a letter, for example, that might allow us to better understand the timeline of these events. I have very mixed feelings on the subject.
Peter, I am not trying to undercut you on this. I find the proposal interesting, but I would like to know why I should support it. If something in particular happened, that is fine. That would allow me to understand why we should summon the commissioner. In my opinion, it would be a much better idea to invite him to review the follow-up on the Acadian II file. Even if there were three investigations, they do not indicate that we got to the bottom of the Acadian II story. On the contrary, there remain many unanswered questions. This committee will eventually have to deal with that. It would be a different discussion, another story.
As for the events of February 22, I followed it on television as did many others. I have my own theories as to what happened, but I would like to better understand the thrust of Mr. Stoffer's motion before saying whether I will support it or not.