There's still a connection to the motion, but I'll be more careful.
Would the official opposition have preferred that the federal government simply disregard the upcoming second wave and act as certain provincial Conservative premiers did who disregarded warnings about the second wave? Would that have been better?
The Prime Minister spoke responsibly on national television, urging Canadians to limit their contacts and travel, among other things. In spite of that, some people are still gathering and others travelling.
It's all well and good to use prorogation as a way to take a step back, to make the best possible decisions and to send clear messages to our fellow citizens, but they are nevertheless the ones who spread the virus. The Prime Minister spoke responsibly when he urged Canadians to limit their contacts. He tried to save Christmas, since it's an important celebration for Canadians. The prorogation made it possible for us to take a step back before making that decision.
During that time, the official opposition ridiculed his national speech, characterizing it as alarmist and unhelpful. What he was told was that there was no need to fear. They thought we were scaring people. And yet, today, thousands of people are dead.
The committee has conducted a study on the prorogation. I listened to the opposition members and witnesses at our most recent meetings. I read everyone's testimony. I also listened to the Leader of the Government in the House.
I think the members of the committee at times show partisan tendencies that shape the way they view events, but there has to be a limit to that. You have to be honest with the committee. We have to work together to achieve something new. I'm a team player, and I often wear the captain's “C” on my jersey.
With your permission, I'm going to quote the former Conservative member for Elgin—Middlesex—London. In 2010, he said, “Prorogation, as I have stated, is at the core of the separation of powers. It provides the Crown with a mechanism for responding to changing circumstances.”
In the government's mind, is there any greater change than COVID-19? We now have to vote remotely. There was also a serious global economic crisis last year, as a result of which we began the new parliamentary session with new priorities. Those priorities were stated in the throne speech, which was presented to parliamentarians and the Canadian people upon our return following the prorogation.
I suppose that a one-of-a-kind global pandemic that changed the lives of some 7 billion people around the world doesn't amount to a change in circumstances in the opposition's view. I don't know what it takes for the opposition to change its opinion. We have to work together once and for all to move forward and draft a report.
I will now let my colleagues take over, Madam Chair.
Thank you. I will come back later, if necessary.