Thanks, Chair.
There are a couple of things that I'll cover off.
I disagree respectfully with my colleague from the Bloc with respect to the office of Governor General and our transitioning to a republic, but I'm pleased that she seems to have found some consensus with her colleague from Mount Royal, who seems to be looking for that transition to happen. I'm quite pleased with the established practices that we have and am proud to be part of the Commonwealth, and God save the King.
That being said, I think the Governor General could save some money. It's important that we pay attention to the amount, with respect to Mr. Housefather's comments, that the Governor General didn't spend. To my reading, there were hundreds of thousands of dollars, more than three-quarters of a million dollars, in lapsed funding from the Governor General's office. We have the ability to make a reduction of $136,986.31 because that's an amount that was identified, through the work of this committee, as excess and luxuries that are incompatible with the expectations of Canadians. We don't need to produce a study on that.
While with all due respect I appreciate the history lesson from Mr. Johns on what happened more than 10 years ago, we've had a Liberal government for eight years. If, by voting against this motion, the NDP wants to effectively support luxury and excess for the Governor General in having an extra $136,986.31 for champagne and caviar, that's certainly their prerogative, but I wasn't here in 2012. I'm here in 2023. I'm going to vote to reduce the budget by $136,986.31, because what we've seen from her office is not consistent with what's acceptable when Canadians are facing the hardships they're facing.