Yes, It's really early, Chair. We'll get you another coffee. You must be hallucinating.
I just wanted to say that we don't have any issue with the contribution agreement being reviewed by committee members. I question the objective of this being a good use of our committee time, to be honest. I think members will review that contribution agreement and be satisfied, and we can quickly move beyond this.
I know the Conservatives have continued to study this at multiple committees. I believe our committee time is really valuable. We had just agreed to a motion that schedules some of our time and accommodates a lot of the interests, objectives and some of the priorities of the different parties. We're trying to be very fair and reasonable. I think we came to an agreement on that, and then this was the very next thing.
I'm just letting you know that I'm opposed to this because I question the objective and the motive behind it. I think the Conservatives have made their points on the record very clear. They're interested in doing this to try to continue studying SDTC for evermore. I don't think that's necessary. We've had enough investigations and reviews. The government has stepped up time and time again to get to the bottom of this. I think we have held people accountable.
I would just say we're opposed to the motion as amended.
The contribution agreements are something I'm sure members will enjoy reviewing. Go nuts.