Thank you very much.
I'm going to take a few minutes to comment on this point of order.
You haven't seen me yet this morning, but I was watching on ParlVU. When Mr. Therrien told me that something might be happening on the committee, I said to myself that I should go and listen to the discussions. To be honest, almost nothing has happened for two months. While listening to the discussions, I thought that something constructive might happen to get us out of the deadlock we were in. Then the obstruction started again and I became less focused on the conversation.
I joined the meeting at 1 p.m. when Mr. Therrien was no longer available. Had I not been there this morning, everything I heard from 1 p.m. on would have given me the impression not only that the discussion had stalled, but that it had even regressed. If I don't comment on the positive aspects of this morning's discussion, it's because I find that the Liberals are asking us to present a written motion for the simple purpose of asking us to present a written motion. They've said they might not even look at it, because the only thing they are interested in is the amendment that we are debating, and which they are systematically obstructing.
We showed that we were receptive and put some concrete proposals forward. If the Liberals are asking us to present a written motion without showing any interest in it, then I find that insulting. I hope that all the committee members want to achieve something constructive. However, that will require more than simply asking us to present a motion in writing.
The Liberals will have to show that they're acting in good faith. Everything that I saw from 1 p.m. on was a step backwards, as the systematic obstruction continued, so consistently that we were getting used to it. That's how I see the situation after having heard a portion of the discussions.