Right.
I'll pick up on the comment you made, Madam Chair, in regard to this instruction to our analysts to do some very interesting work to extricate all of that stuff or pull it out of there. They're commendable and wise people. They probably will have some way through to doing that, but I think we need to be very clear, because it's no easy task for them. We're creating some extra work for them, obviously, because some of it's embedded a little more seriously; other parts can probably be extracted or removed with greater ease.
I quickly want to speak to motive before I make a final comment. I think the idea of that particular amendment or motion to make it part of the report was to get some balance on the issue. We had limited time. We couldn't spend inexhaustible time in this committee looking at the issue. I think the true intent, or the sincere intent, was to get some balance on the issue.
I think it was in order that way. The intent was to temper our report by way of that. That, I think, speaks to the motive and the intent of why we were trying to have that--in quotes--“considered”.
In conclusion, yesterday we had the privilege of hosting some Swedish parliamentarians in the room off the parliamentary restaurant. It was interesting; we got on to a number of topics, as you do on these occasions. We were learning from them, and they from us. This long-form census scenario came up, and how they handle this kind of thing. Well, they don't do it any more in that country, I was told. They're a government that has a history and a succession, if you will, but they don't do it because they don't require to do it. There are other ways to collate that information and draw it together, and I think that within our Canadian context it's not a great deal different.
Bbut that was the point. Actually, the individual sitting to my left--to my left on a political scale of things as well, from a centre-left party, if you will--was the one who remarked on this, and not in any negative way at all. She said they didn't need to do that: they collate, they gather, they collect that information without the need to do a long-form census submitted with questions like that. We had a quick little discussion on it, and it wasn't put down by her. She is in fact a member of the opposition and a member of a more left-leaning party, if you will.
Anyhow, I just offer that. I think we have to be very clear.
The other thing I have here is a request to Mr. Lessard.
Does he want to remove any references to statements relating to something said in the industry committee, or remarks made by the minister? Is he wanting that? It might have been made by a member opposite or by somebody in testimony here, maybe in a disparaging sense, in reference to the industry committee testimony. It might have been remarks made there or remarks by the minister. Is that what is meant to be removed as well?
Those things were actually said. They were germane and they were said right at this very committee. At some point, maybe in his earlier remarks, he would want to respond to us and to the analyst and clerk on whether he wants those references removed. There were a few of those remarks made by people in the witness chair or by members opposite. They were somewhat disparaging remarks, possibly; nevertheless, are they to be removed as well by our analysts and clerk in their redrafting of the report?