So we're playing games with this. If the minister, the elected representative, does not have input into the agency, then we're in a difficult position, because it's the elected representatives of this Parliament who make those decisions.
But on another point in point two, let's read this: “...the parliamentary secretary, speaking for the minister, was himself misled...”. It goes on and then says, “We now know this also to be untrue”. Well, which is “also” referring to? Is it referring to the minister being misled, or the next statement within that sentence? I think it's very poor wordsmithing and could be confusing.
So point two should be excluded for a number of reasons.
I just want to go back to what was pointed out earlier, which is that it was very unfortunate that this committee wasted an hour of its time waiting for translation when in fact we had four days that could have provided more than adequate time to get a motion to this committee and translation in order. We could have had at least another 45 minutes of productive discussion on this entire package.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.