Thank you, Madam Chair.
Good morning, colleagues.
Thank you for being here, Mr. Johnston.
Today we are trying to mount the greatest possible defence of our democracy, which is under attack by foreign interference. What we're doing today is extremely important.
When I go door to door, people tell me they aren't sure they'll vote. I'm sure you hear the same thing. So I encourage them to do so by telling them that it's important to vote and to get involved because their choice may decide the colour of the government and of the policies that are adopted.
However, more and more people are abstaining, and we're struggling against that trend. Unfortunately, when we see these threats of interference, people's trust in democracy and in our institutions declines. That can lead them to think that the dice are loaded, to wonder what's the point of voting and to question whether foreigners are deciding for them. This can take on extremely large proportions. It's this trust that we have to protect, and it’s our institutions that we must protect.
According to the latest Léger poll, 72% of people want an independent public inquiry because the situation is critical. It's important to shed all possible light on this matter, and people think that's the only way to do it. I won't cite you a whole list of reasons, but many experts in the field tell us we need to hold an independent public inquiry. Most of the members in the House have said that we need to strike a public and independent inquiry.
In his report, Mr. Johnston rejects this option. I'd like to know why he rejects the idea of an independent public inquiry, which so many people have called for.