I'm making a point on this type of motion. I think you made it in the past and make it again.
The reports that Mr. Telegdi would like to put in as reports before the House have already been recognized as reports by the House. There are conclusions and recommendations made by the committee that are available to anyone.
However, to say that we should adopt those reports of that committee as reports of this committee and send it to the House as if we ratify and approve everything in the report, which is what he's asking, I think is unfair to this committee. It certainly is unfair to individual members like me who were not here at the time when the reports were put together. For instance, Mr. Rahim Jaffer was there, and certainly he can decide. If he decided then to support it, he may well now.
The point of the matter is there are only four members of that committee on this committee. Certainly I and others were not parties to that. When you hear witnesses, you certainly have the opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses, you have the opportunity to ask them questions, and you have the opportunity to have input into the process and the recommendations themselves.
I don't think it's fair to have those reports, which are legitimate reports, then become adopted by this committee as if the committee heard and actually had the opportunity to intervene. I know one of the issues in the tenth report was of course the burden of proof that was required for revocation of citizens, and there's a fair difference of opinion by some as to whether it should be on a balance of probabilities or beyond a reasonable doubt.
Certainly some witnesses suggested even a different burden that was specified during those hearings. I think the words they used were “clear and convincing evidence”, which is yet a different standard. Not to have input, in a fashion, I think, as appropriate, is just not something we should get in the habit of doing. Those reports are there; they speak for themselves. But to get this committee to adopt it I think is wrong in principle now and it would be wrong in the future. If we want to have further hearings, then let's do that.
For that reason, I would certainly oppose the motion, although there are many aspects of the reports--and I've looked through them--that I think are good recommendations and fair recommendations. They are not something one can argue against. Overall, it's not the way to do business, and I think this motion should be withdrawn.