I would say thanks for the clarification. I'm not sure if it provides me relief.
I know you are with me on participatory democracy and with many of your thoughts on civic engagement and the importance of citizen juries and other things like this that I know you're interested, Mr. Blaikie, in studying in the future. But I think I would say the way I view it is that taking the time to check in with Canadians between the first and second wave does not seem to me to be out of line or this sort of almost.... I don't want to characterize it the way you do because I don't see it the way you do. I see it as a part of that legislative process. To me these two things are fundamentally related in a healthy democracy. We've seen opposition parties delay key support and bills through the House of Commons for political purposes that relate specifically to COVID relief. We're seeing that now with concurrence motions.
I would say to you that it goes both ways. If it were so important to get that work done, then what about now? Why are opposition parties stalling things in the House and delaying our ability to get things done for Canadians? This motion is another attempt at that.
If you're so concerned about the efficiency with which we move forward then you would be dropping this particular motion and moving on with the supports that matter to Canadians right now. Having the Prime Minister come before this committee and testify does not seem to me to be a great use of the time.
I want to get back to my remarks and my conversation—