Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I think we need to take a step back to where this all started. It started from an original motion from Mr. Holland that called for full investigation, for the committee to be engaged on the whole process of Xstrata--a whole series of different machinations related to the takeover processes. That was something the committee could have chosen to do. We could have gone down that path to have those hearings.
The reason I proposed the subamendment, which is now the main motion, was that it gets to the due process issue. If there wasn't support at least to go down the road of having those full-out hearings, we would get to really the crux of the matter.
I thank Mr. Fontana for bringing a copy of the act to today's meeting, because I think it highlights that this is in the minister's purview. Too, we're talking about the express will of this committee, and the express will of me as a member of this committee. The minister can either listen to us or not listen to us, or he can pick words out here or there that he may not like or disagree with, but I'm more concerned about what's going to happen in Sudbury right now versus some European bureaucracy in Brussels holding up a process, or exposing a weakness, that we have in Canada.
So I think the motion we have on the floor is sufficient. I appreciate the concerns of the parliamentary secretary about the minister, but with all due respect, this is the expression of this committee, and it will be the minister, at the end of the day, to take that guidance from us.