Thank you, Madam Chair.
We have some difficulty with the motion as it stands. I'd like to suggest a friendly amendment. We as a government and members have no difficulty with calling in witnesses to add more clarification to the issue between Rosdev and Public Works in that. With regard to the witnesses, though, I would like to remove the second paragraph, “That the unelected Minister of Public Works [...]”, and the reasoning is very, very simple.
Minister Fortier has appeared before this committee probably more than any other minister on the Hill--six times now before this committee. The last time he was here, just a short while ago again, the minister was left wanting for questions on this file, and the minister left early simply because there were no more questions.
This motion suggests that the minister is hiding something. He has been totally forthright for six consecutive times coming before this committee.
Also in here, the wording says “to explain, among other things”. Well, it's totally ludicrous to ask a minister to come before committee to explain “things”, without even knowing what “things” are. How would you even prepare information to come to explain “things”?
I really think that is a real level of inadequacy that just doesn't do justice, to bring officials here to give explicit answers to explicit questions. I really honestly do believe that it's politically motivated, because obviously the minister is running against one of her compatriot members, and I think we should get beyond that.