Mr. Chair, I don't want to be brief, but I may be.
This is the second time I've seen this kind of thing in committee. Surprisingly, it's because of the Bloc Québécois even though witnesses from Quebec came all the way here to talk about homelessness and affordable housing. You know, Quebec has tremendous expertise. It was a golden opportunity for them to share that expertise and for Canada to benefit from it.
I can hardly believe that the Bloc Québécois is preventing witnesses from Quebec from speaking in committee. Last time, I told Ms. Larouche that she missed a very good opportunity by voting against the 2025 budget. Here in committee, she applauds all of the programs and measures funded in this budget. I'm not going to use the word I have in mind because I'm in committee and I have a lot of respect for her.
Thanks to the Bloc Québécois, the witnesses from Quebec also missed a good opportunity this morning, a golden opportunity to speak on behalf of Quebeckers and to show them that the Bloc Québécois really stands up for their interests in Ottawa. That's not my own opinion. The Bloc Québécois has just proven to Quebeckers that it doesn't really stand up for their interests in Ottawa. Indeed, if I were from Quebec and a Bloc Québécois member was preventing me from speaking in committee, I would have questions.
I'm going to talk about Ms. Larouche's motion. This motion calls for the production of several thousand pages of documents from several departments. A similar motion was moved yesterday at the Standing Committee on Public Accounts, where members are currently debating an amendment. It could cost millions of dollars, and it wouldn't be doable in the time frame proposed by the motion. It's not realistic to expect that many documents to be produced by the suggested deadline. Public servants would have to sift through millions of documents across several departments.
That would have consequences. Every dollar spent on compiling documents is a dollar not invested in services to Canadians and, above all, Quebeckers. Canadians and Quebeckers expect timely services, but this motion would take public servants' time away from processing applications.
Our priority should be improving service delivery, not creating an administrative burden for public servants.
The rules say that committees have the right to request information, but such requests must be focused and reasonable. If this motion were to pass, it would set a precedent for unlimited and overly broad applications. That's important. The work of gathering up documents from all over the government would be for nothing. It's not important.
Parliamentarians know we have to use committee resources wisely. I'm a Quebec MP who serves on a committee in Ottawa, but if I were a Quebecker currently in Quebec and I saw this kind of thing, I would have some questions and, when the next election rolls around, I would give the Bloc Québécois the boot, because people need to respect Quebeckers.
The Bloc Québécois says that it's here in Ottawa to represent and fight for Quebec's interests. This isn't how you fight for Quebec's interests in committee. These witnesses are Quebeckers. They're experts from Quebec who are here to talk about housing, homelessness, Build Canada Homes, Bill C‑20 and the continuum concept that includes services and transition houses with services.
Make no mistake: I am stunned and shocked. If Quebeckers knew how the Bloc Québécois is behaving in Ottawa and especially in committee—and they will know, because I'm here now—they would never vote for the Bloc Québécois.
I'll give someone else the floor.