And to the viewers, I apologize if you've not been able to hear my remarks, because there have been some gyrations over there.
When I brought forward the name, that this is in fact Stéphane Dion, I know it's probably something they would have liked to know before the leadership convention occurred.
Although it's not normal to have a leader of the opposition before a committee, I would be prepared to let him explain his conduct and the conduct of the riding association before the committee, as part of the overall study that would look into the financial practices of all parties.
So I say that to them, if they would be so kind—I see that we have Mr. McGuinty, Mr. Patry, and Ms. Redman—to feel free to communicate to their leader that we on this side would be willing to entertain a motion to bring him forward to explain these new revelations.
It looks like there's a real mess on hand, Mr. Chair, because we have a whole group of opposition parties who have declared that the practice of transferring funds between parties and local riding associations is an egregious violation of the law, but today we find out that they have engaged in exactly the same transfers.
I think with these new revelations in mind, the committee, I'm sure, would be willing to change its approach and that members of the opposition who have been blocking any study of their financial practices would alter their position and agree to have hearings on how they've been managing their affairs, now that this has been publicly revealed and it's no longer being kept a secret that they have engaged in exactly the transfers they are decrying.
With that in mind, Mr. Chair, I propose an amendment. It reads as follows:
That the Committee on Procedure and House Affairs conduct a thorough study into the Conservative Party of Canada, the Liberal Party of Canada, the Bloc Québécois, and the NDP's use of transfers between the national parties, the electoral district associations, and the local campaigns to determine if these transactions were sufficiently legitimate, transparent, and in congruence with the law for all elections dating back to 1997.
I know that some in the past have been anxious to defeat such a motion and have it ruled right out of order, because they've already voted against it, but in light of the new revelations that have come forward today, I think the motion is deserving of some more consideration. I think that given that the cameras are here and given that Liberal members are learning about the practices of their leader and his riding association, the members might entertain this motion and start to begin hearings as soon as possible, so that we can get to the bottom of all of these things, and that all members and all parties—