I want to address the political interference argument raised by my Liberal colleague.
As Mr. Caron said, it's quite the opposite. The motion—if my colleague would take the time to read it—is to review the implications of the OECD monitoring of the Prime Minister's interference scandal on the perception of Canada abroad.
As I demonstrated earlier, and as we saw last March, Canada's reputation has taken a hit in a number of countries. I gave the example of Chile, but there have been other examples in different parts of the world. As my colleague said, this issue affects not only our diplomatic capabilities, but also the economic influence of our companies and their reputation abroad.
The parliamentary session is coming to an end. We don't have many committee meetings left. However, by reviewing the issue, we can show that the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development cares about Canada's reputation and the success of its companies abroad.
That's why the motion introduced by Mr. Caron, from the New Democratic Party, is very relevant in the current context. I plan to fully support it.