I'll simply make the point that notwithstanding the government's conspiracy theory.... They're always accusing us of being conspiratorial in everything, and they've done it again here today. Notwithstanding that, it's a very simple request. This is not unusual on committees. We are asking our analysts to provide the committee with a summary of the testimony. All it is is a tool to inform the public—because this will be looked at not only now, but they will be studying this for some time, I assure you, and it's not going to look good for the government in history—and also to inform colleagues who didn't have the benefit of being here for the hearings and who do not have the time as a rule to do that kind of background research on every single bill that comes before the House. It would inform them for their participation in debate at report stage and third reading.
Notwithstanding the government's concern that there's some big conspiratorial plot, all we want really is a tool. I'm not surprised the government is saying no, because they haven't wanted to be forthright, open, or helpful at all, and everybody knows that, but it's not stopping us from trying to make the government do the right thing. All this is is a regular kind of business where we have a complex issue, many complex presentations, and sometimes differing points of view, and it just provides a summary for the media, the public, and colleagues who aren't on this committee. There's nothing unreasonable about this, Chair.
If the government votes it down, which it looks like they're going to, then it's just one more example of how undemocratic and unhelpful they are in terms of anybody having participation or knowing what's going on. It's just one more example of the government's bloody-minded approach to changing our election laws whether anybody else likes it or not.