Thanks very much, Mr. Chair.
It's certainly the chair's prerogative as to whether or not the chair will allow for questioning from one member to another. The previous chair, whom I know quite intimately, did allow for it. Should you entertain it, I have a question for Mr. Cooper in hopes of gaining some clarity—if Mr. Cooper and the chair agree.
I certainly don't have any issue whatsoever with looking into these very serious matters, but I'm a little bit perplexed because there are a few contradictions here. One is that it says that the committee—this is at the very end—would “decide what work will be deemed necessary”. However, the determination is being made based on work that's already been undertaken. Effectively, he is asking for the analysts, the clerk and others to take a variety of different studies that have already been undertaken—hundreds of hours' worth of testimony and studies at this committee—compile them all into something that is found in one document, and then present that back to the committee so that the committee can review something it has already reviewed.
If you're a new member to this committee or a new member to the House, all you have to do is ask your assistant to click on the three or four different studies where this information is available and read them. You will then walk away with everything you need to know about what this committee has done. In other words, the committee is in a position right now to determine whether or not it believes this work is necessary. If members have not read those, so be it. Of course, it's a new Parliament; they need time to do that. However, they can take the time to read them and then come to that determination.
The second point I want to make is that Mr. Cooper referenced a variety of new pieces of information in his introduction to this motion that reference the 45th election and things that transpired during that election period. None of the information that could become available to us would be found in any type of summary provided by the clerk and the analysts by virtue of the fact that the election took place after those studies. Therefore, there's an inherent contradiction.
My question for Mr. Cooper, who I think is going to respond to this, is this: Why is this necessary? Why are we spending the time, the money, the energy and the resources that are required to put this into one neat document when all of the information already exists and is publicly available?
Thank you, Mr. Chair.