I'd like to put this on the record. I'd really like to know—we had some discussions before committee—what Mr. Crête's intent is with the motion, if he could talk about it on the record. We would like to hopefully keep the study in committee, if the issue is that we want to hear more witnesses. I foresee, if we report it to the House, that we're going to end up debating a concurrence motion for three hours before we even hear any more witnesses. It seems to be a redundant position. Why bother tying up the House for three hours if the main issue is wanting to hear more witnesses?
On October 26th, 2006. See this statement in context.