Mr. Chair, thank you.
I want to maybe agree with the part Mr. Cullen said in his previous statement, to the effect that we take the assumption that most members of the committee are fully aware of and familiar with this issue.
I think I would like to apply that reasoning to the motion itself, the wording of it, where it's called a reckless decision. Quite frankly, I'm not as familiar with the wind energy system as perhaps Mr. Cullen is, and I would say that I'm probably not alone on this committee. Before I would vote on a motion like this, which makes assumptions about the program in the motion, I would like to be a little more aware and more educated about wind energy so that I could intelligently debate the motion.
At the end of the day I may agree with the member that maybe it is a reckless decision. At the end of the day I may not agree with him. But I would not be prepared to accept the wording of this motion based on, maybe, the singular knowledge of Mr. Cullen. I think that while everyone probably has an idea about wind energy and its benefits or deficits, there are some of us who know a whole lot more about it than the others.
If you look at what the motion's asking of the government, it's a fairly substantial motion. I don't think it should be arbitrarily debated without having the full resources of knowledge of the industry a little more distributed throughout the committee. I'd be happy to debate it, but I'd like to have the benefit of hearing some experts here to tell us a little bit more about the industry before we decide arbitrarily whether it's a reckless decision or not.