Thank you, Mr. Chair.
First off, allow me to congratulate you as well on being selected as the chair of this committee. Let me say that I am new to this committee, unlike many of you, and that I very much look forward to working with each and every single one of you.
With respect to some of the issues that have been raised, the first issue I'd like to touch on is that this committee will not be meeting until February. This is something that Ms. McPherson brought up.
Yes, I share her frustration. I think all of us would like to roll up our sleeves and get to work, but I think it's important to highlight that this is not specific to the foreign affairs committee. It is actually something that all of our committees are working through.
The second issue I wanted to comment on is that I'm somewhat surprised by the motion that has been brought in. I had a motion myself. I'm sure other colleagues here did as well.
On that particular point, allow me to say this. As an observer to this foreign affairs committee in the past, I think it is important that members act in a collegial manner. That is what Canadians expect of us: that on issues as significant and as important as foreign affairs, international development and national security, they see each and every single one of us working together.
In my opinion, just all of a sudden coming up with this motion is not necessarily in that spirit, in the sense that each of us has a number of different priorities that we would like to focus on, and there should be a better process to make sure that the agenda of this committee reflects the issues that are of concern to most of us.
I would be very much in favour of the process or modality that has been identified by Mr. Oliphant, which is that we should take all of the motions, including the one that has been tabled by Mr. Chong, and refer them to the subcommittee so that we can make sure all of us continue to work together and continue to focus on those issues that matter.
Let me also say this. I agree that the China-Canada relationship is an important one. It's one that Canadians from coast to coast to coast care about. It's not about substance that I have any misgivings here; it is just about working out a routine that works for all of us.
Finally, if I could also comment on an issue raised by Mr. Bergeron, he did say that we have to plumb the depths of this mystery, which is part of the substance of what Mr. Chong has tabled here. Let me say that yes, Canadians want to know all these issues and they want to understand them, but they're not willing to do it at the expense of actually not doing it in a professional manner and not making sure that our national security interests are upheld.
On that point, I think it's important to also highlight the important work that the national security committee is doing. There are issues that they are fully apprised of, and it is a committee that consists of members from various parties, so it's not a partisan one. At times like this and on issues that implicate—possibly implicate, I should say—our national security, there are mechanisms. I don't necessarily think that dealing with “redacted” materials on issues that pertain to national security is necessarily the best process to adopt.
This is all to say that I very much look forward to working with all the members here, and I'm very much in favour of the process that has been outlined to make sure the various motions that we all have drafted are considered and we all can work together, hopefully, to set up the agenda for this committee.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.