Thank you.
First of all, let me say that I agree with a lot of what Mr. Davies said about transparency. Having worked a lot of years in a lot of developing countries, I certainly note that the world is inundated with Canadians who go to other countries to preach the importance of transparency and accountability; yet, you come back to Canada, and sometimes we don't seem to have the same enthusiasm for transparency and accountability in our own country. I fully appreciate and agree with the importance of transparency.
I am in favour, however, of the amended motion, which is to remove emails. I think it's because of the practicality. Certainly, the Department of Health is under immense pressure to do all kinds of things. I don't think there's ever been a time in our history when the department has been overworked like they are at the moment. There's just no end to the number of issues that they have to deal with. A lot of those things don't even come to our attention. There are things like ECMO. There are all kinds of medical issues and epidemiological issues that they're dealing with, and this, having to produce documents, takes them away from their other tasks.
Although I can appreciate that the number of documents, emails, may be limited, there are all kinds of motions. When you start adding them all up, it seems it's producing a lot of stuff. Emails, I think, too, may contain a lot of discussion about the provinces and what they are doing. I think that, when you're communicating with other members of government, you want to be honest as to your appraisal of the situation, but in doing so, you may be saying things that other levels of government, like provinces, may not really appreciate in your candour. I think there is reason to want to be a little prudent in what is released.
I, too, am foreshadowing. I think there will be other amendments to this, but the email limitation seems, to me, a reasonable one.