Thank you for the opportunity to speak to this amendment.
It's unfortunate that it sounds like we won't get to hear the rest of the testimony from our witnesses today. I think it'll be helpful for us to get a written submission from them with some more details about some of the aspects that we were looking to talk about.
I don't know, Madam Clerk, if it's possible to send in some questions to the witnesses that they could then respond to.
I do want to speak to this amendment, which we will be opposing on this side.
You know, this is a very important study that was created and prompted with collaboration. It came from the other side, and we on this side, having already done in 2025, if you recall, a three-session study in a very collaborative fashion on the auto sector that, again, was prompted by the other side, agreed to an additional study, this time with more of a focus on the electric vehicle sector. We as members have been working collaboratively on now two studies.
I just want to recall that, when we have been working collaboratively, we have actually been in a frame, a mould or a situation where we've been able to get response from the government—not always the policy objectives that were achieved by the opposition. We had the minister in front of us. The minister has already been asked to return on autos once. The result of the earlier study.... All of this is in the context of what I think is.... I'm making these remarks about the earlier study and the work that we've done to date to express my disappointment about the direction that this amendment seems to be taking.
As a result of collaborative work, we were able to generate some very specific commitments from the minister on that first study. For instance, the Minister of Industry came and reported to us her intention to pursue legal options with respect to Stellantis after its decision around Brampton.
I think, if I'm looking at my colleagues around the table here—