I want to expand very briefly on Mr. Moore's statement. If we were starting from square one and this weren't in process and activities hadn't taken place, this could totally compromise the extent to which offers could come in or might not have come in.
Beyond that, another point I would like to make is that there isn't one person in this committee who's an expert in this field. At least, I don't know one person on this committee who is a total expert in this field. We've all had various degrees of experiences in property management and/or business, but what we did was listen to experts. We had many expert witnesses in, and without exception, every expert witness testified that this would be an appropriate process to follow at this time.
That's why I'm deeply concerned that here we are as a committee throwing this up, and going this way now flies right in the face of the testimony of any witness we have had here. Particularly, following through on Mr. Walsh's comments, this motion almost insults our process, in that regardless of who is there, as Mr. Walsh said, there is a reasonable expectation of that person's acting in a responsible manner as a parliamentarian and as an official. Quite obviously this says, basically, “We don't think you are.”
In the face of the testimony that's already been given, I find that a little incredible. Had we heard conflicting testimony; if we had four against three this way, or there had been conflicting arguments, or there had been people who were suspect and weren't really straight about this.... But every bit of testimony we've had here has supported this argument and this position and this direction of the government. That's why I'm a little bit concerned that here we are at the eleventh hour now, literally at the eleventh hour—