Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
As I said earlier, I cannot support the motion. We need to move forward and wrap up the debate on this motion.
We need to acknowledge that there is a difference between the government and the opposition. Normally, the government is the party that is less interested in hearing from certain witnesses. I am not accusing any one political party. I'm taking about the government, whether it be Liberal, Conservative or something else. For that reason, the last time around, we passed a motion calling on the committee to decide from the outset which witnesses it would be calling. Someone said we shouldn't cry over split milk, but I have to say that it can be painful at times, because the child could starve to death. Sometimes, we need to remember the past. We are not the ones who sent witnesses home.
In the past, the committee decided to invite witnesses to attend certain meetings. People flew in from Winnipeg, Manitoba, and then the chair blithely chose to cancel the meeting. The witnesses were forced to fly home. This decision did not come from the opposition. So then, we must never forget the past, if we want things to be better in the future. We are not saying that the government cannot be represented on the committee, but merely that the government will not be able to stop the proceedings. I believe we are acting in good faith.
When the motion was first passed in 2006, we never thought that the Conservative government was going to stop committees from meeting. This is something the Liberals have also resorted to in the past. When the opposition and the government invite witnesses to Ottawa, we want them to have the opportunity to testify. This mechanism would ensure that that happens. As I said earlier, no one objected to the government's presence. If the government was absent, then it was by choice. We are not closing the door. All we are saying is that we will hear from the witnesses.