Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Let me first say that it is possible to discuss both matters. There is no reason why we cannot do so. For that reason, I second the motion put forward by our colleague Mr. Preston. This is an urgent matter, given that by-elections are scheduled for next week. The rules need to be clarified. I for one completely disagree with Elections Canada's interpretation of this question and I strongly endorse the positions taken by the party leaders. However, perhaps some of the parties here do not wish to discuss this key issue. Perhaps some are afraid of a debate because they are not ready to take a stand. Our party's position is clear and we are prepared to have this debate and to clarify the rules.
With regard to some of the points made by other members, not only are we more than willing to go ahead with the discussion on how all parties have carried out electoral financing in previous elections, we are actually quite excited about having this discussion. The more research we do, the more this discussion is starting to become of great interest. So I look forward to--later on, of course--a motion that will bring forward the financial practices of all the parties before this committee. There's no reason why we can't have that discussion in the same week as we're having a discussion on an issue for which there is a short timeframe, and which we will face this coming Monday.
Once again, I strongly disagree with the interpretation of the Chief Electoral Officer with respect to veiled voting. I think this committee has to take a leadership role in setting the record straight so that the misinterpretation is not allowed to go ahead.
So we look forward to having some hearings on both of these issues, and I suspect that they will both be very fruitful. Thank you.