Thanks, Madam Chair.
We've covered the ground already. The House has voted on the question of whether there should be a public inquiry. The House didn't direct or ask the Prime Minister to subcontract out the question. We, as a majority, on behalf of Canadians, called for a public inquiry. The work done thus far, though incomplete, does not satisfy the real concerns Canadians have about confidence in our democratic institutions. It's critical that whatever steps are taken, going forward, are done with the reflection of the will of Parliament to have that public inquiry.
Having the opposition leaders unable to speak to some of the elements is certainly a regrettable amendment to this motion, but ensuring there's a process in place that has Canadians' confidence and one they're comfortable with.... There's been public opinion polling completed that shows that three-quarters of Canadians want a public inquiry. It's something they understand. My colleague Mr. Berthold quite rightly pointed out that we have, as a country, done this in the past. We've had public inquiries that dealt with issues related directly to questions of national security. They are, of course, always carried out in a way that protects methods and sources, as well as our relationships with our intelligence-sharing allies, such as our Five Eyes partners. You can believe, by what's gone on in the last several years—the last couple of months—and by what's been revealed in Mr. Johnston's assessment, that the machinery of government, with respect to the national security apparatus, is failing Canadians. A public inquiry is an understandable and a transparent way for Canadians to have some resolution to that, one that's outside of the hands of the PMO and the Trudeau Foundation affiliates, and that is truly independent.
The outcomes we will get from a public inquiry, and the report out of that, are not always ones the government is comfortable with, but Canadians have confidence in that process. There are guardrails used in the past that ensure the process is carried out with integrity and that the selection of the individual charged with executing that inquiry.... That's one of paramount importance, and it's why we've called for the government to consult with opposition parties on that.
I'll leave it there, Madam Chair.
It might be helpful for us to get you, or perhaps the clerk, to read back the placing of my subamendment. I appreciate that I offered it verbally without having cobbled it onto the amendment that was there. If it has been circulated for everyone's understanding, that's great. I don't have anything further to add on it. Thank you.