Thank you, Madam Chair.
I'll just respond very briefly, and hopefully the parliamentary secretary will listen to this, because his description of the motion is wholly inaccurate. He doesn't seem to have even read it.
This motion is not about extending the study; it is about granting the committee the power to adopt amendments that expand the existing scope of the bill. That does not change the timeline for consideration. It is about expanding the scope of the kinds of amendments that can be heard and considered by the committee.
I suspect that all of the organizations that he claims support him would be enthusiastic about this motion. This motion simply gives the committee the power to do its work, to adopt amendments that would allow the expansion of munitions exports.
The parliamentary secretary should read it again, should reflect on what it says and should note that this is about giving the committee the power to consider more amendments.
When those amendments come to the table, if members decide at that time that they don't like those amendments, they can, of course, vote them down or, in any event, consider them on their merits. What Conservatives are asking for is simply that the committee be able, during clause-by-clause, to consider amendments that would have the effect of significantly easing the sale and export of munitions to Ukraine.
Ukraine needs munitions more than anything else. We have reasonable amendments that I think could gain broad support and that we would like to put before the committee in the course of this study. We need to adopt a motion that would expand the scope in order to be able to do that.
I ask Liberals and other members of the committee not to get in the way of reasonable proposed amendments that would allow the export of munitions. Enough with the performative allyship. Let's focus on what Ukraine wants and what Ukraine needs, which are weapons that will allow them to win this war.
We're prepared to vote on this.