Thank you.
I'm very intrigued by my colleague's response. I guess I'll have to find out whether the issue here is concern over editorial content—and I'm always wary of editorial content—or actually moving forward with this motion.
If the issue is fundamentally about making statements that are perhaps politicized, I'd be more than willing to augment it to say:
Justice John Gomery appeared before the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates on March 13, 2008.
Then we would strike the third and fourth line of that first paragraph and move right to the second paragraph:
Justice Gomery further testified that the Federal Accountability Act took steps in the right direction on accountability and transparency, but that it was predominantly developed before his report was finished and therefore cannot be considered a response to his recommendations.
That was his position. Then it would continue:
Justice Gomery testified that no meaningful action....
That third paragraph might bother somebody. I don't mind. That's your side of the House versus our side of the House in how we interpret it. If it means moving forward, I would certainly strike that. It's neither here nor there.
So we would be delivering something more fact-based. He came and this is what he said. We want to thank him as a committee for his work, because someone in government should do that, and we're taking it upon ourselves.
That leads me to the fundamental issue of the three key recommendations we're asking the government to study and report back on. They can choose to do that in their own time.
If my colleague's concern is on the Lobbyists Registration Act, which is not yet in force but is moving ahead, that shouldn't pose any problem to the government because it will be completed.
The public appointments commission was a commitment. Justice Gomery made it clear that he felt it should move ahead.
So if we can strike some of the language in the preamble and move forward with that, I don't think it should present any problem to anyone on the government side. So I'm interested to see if I can get support on that.