Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I have a couple of things, and then I'll respond to Ms. Gallant's question.
I'm a bit perplexed by many of my Liberal friends saying that an invitation would be political. This is political. It's about a leak from a cabinet meeting from Scott Brison. It's a breach of trust charge that hung over Vice-Admiral Norman. In fact, he was relieved of his command position as vice-chief of the defence staff well before the actual charge. At its heart, this is political. This is why it's in question period. This is why we would be seized with it.
Mr. Brison is no longer here. Mr. Brison's name was trending on Twitter about a cabinet shuffle if Scott Brison hadn't left. This was actually Scott Brison before. It is political, colleagues, whether you like it or not, and I think, if my friends are convinced that political didn't extend to political interference, then they should have no hesitation to allow some questioning of some of the principals.
Mr. Garrison has at least said that we could allow a form of a protected, appropriate forum for Vice-Admiral Norman to speak at invitation so he can always deny it. I think that's the perfect way to proceed. It is a huge compromise from our large list; we recognize that, but it would be the only forum possible for him to be able to speak. Why? I'll refer to Ms. Gallant's comments that Queen's regulations and orders provide restrictions on political speech for Vice-Admiral Norman, and he is not permitted while serving to make political pronouncements with respect to the government of the day. Any member of the Canadian Armed Forces cannot publicly criticize the government they serve, so he is in a quandary that he can only find relief from at this forum until he retires from the Canadian Armed Forces, and after the last two years, he should be able to be reinstated and make his own decisions about his retirement and how long he'll continue serving.
I appealed, and I wasn't going to speak again. I appealed to specific members because of the unique circumstances and because of the 80,000-plus people, uniformed and civilian, and their families watching this. Rather than the Liberals turning themselves into pretzels to try to find ways not to do this, I think Mr. Garrison's compromise is a perfect ability. If the majority is going to be used to just crush it, just come out and say that. I think that would be more straightforward, as Mr. Bezan said. This is an opportunity for Vice-Admiral Mark Norman to air his concerns about this ordeal, which has been terrible. If they don't want to provide that platform for him, I would prefer you just say that as opposed to impugning motives.
This started with Mr. Brison and a leak and an investigation the Prime Minister ordered, so we did not start this affair. Our responsibility is always to get to the bottom of it. The whip is cracked, and we're going to lose the vote; just do your thing.