Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
I've been waiting for hours to express my point of view.
First, I'd like to apologize for missing the first two hours this morning. I was attending a meeting of the Board of Internal Economy. I'd like to thank my colleague Wayne Long for replacing me. He may not officially be a permanent member of our committee, but he has recently almost become one. We like him very much, and we enjoy his speeches.
I'd also like to thank Ms. Normandin for being with us again. We always enjoy her company and her remarks as well.
Once again, I also want to thank all my colleagues who have already spoken today for their truly informed comments. Thanks as well to Mr. Regan and Mr. Lamoureux for being here, and I apologize if I have forgotten anyone.
Today we are debating Mr. Turnbull's amendment. I've previously spoken on this subject on several occasions, and no one will be surprised by my comments. To date, we have heard from many witnesses, experts and Mr. Rodriguez, who appeared with his own staff. Mr. Rodriguez provided good answers to our questions. Now I think we can start drafting the report.
That being said, Mr. Turnbull, a friend and colleague for whom I have an enormous amount of esteem, is a thoughtful individual. He seems to want to play the role of mediator. He has introduced an amendment on which he has clearly done a great deal of work to assist us in coming to an agreement.
I have to be honest. I still think we could begin drafting the report, but I also think it might be a good compromise to hear a few more witnesses.
[Technical difficulty—Editor] the necessity of a prorogation that the alliance of opposition parties had long predetermined. I stated in my previous comments that the opposition parties had already formed an idea. Again yesterday, we heard in the House of Commons that it had been prorogued as a result of the WE Charity scandal.
I absolutely do not agree. However, I want to comment once again on Mr. Turnbull's amendment, since it's really a [Inaudible—Editor] on this study on the prorogation with facts rather than accusations. I genuinely think that what Mr. Turnbull wants to do is explain facts not make accusations.
As we all know, the Prime Minister prorogued Parliament in order to take the necessary time, and I emphasize the word "necessary," to take stock of Canada's situation, determine the priority sectors and plan the future. Obviously, the absolute priority has always been to protect the health and safety of all Canadians. Looking back, who would have thought, a year ago, that we would find ourselves in this situation?
I'm sure that many of us have yogurt in refrigerators in Ottawa from a year ago. The reality is that many of us never returned to Ottawa. Who would have imagined that at the onset of the pandemic? In the whip's office, when we talked about adjourning because of increasing numbers of COVID-19 cases, never in the world could I have imagined we would be in this situation a year later. However, I'm certain that, if you go to Ottawa right now, you'll definitely see yogurts in fridges with expiry dates…