Thank you, Chair.
In the interest of time and productivity, which the government members have called for, I'll keep my comments brief, as we've now gone on for nearly 45 minutes discussing one single motion.
I apologize for the need to vote in the House of Commons. I know what a hassle that can be when we're passing $260 billion worth of taxpayer money. It's a drag.
The motion, as put before us, was a very simple presentation of a contradiction of a witness's testimony. We heard the witness present that there were no leaks, that it was contained. Then we found out that containment, under the definition of the minister, I suppose, means when water flows out after it has leaked out of a reactor, then it is held for a while, and then it is put into a public river, that is not a leak; it is in fact a containment. When there's a leak of radioactive isotopes out of one of our reactors that then goes up a stack without any treatment whatsoever, that is also not a leak.
I think it behoves the minister...and I suspect, knowing the minister to the point that I do so far, that she'll have no problem in answering these questions. I don't understand the opposition from the government on this. If clearing the air is what they're about, and accountability in terms of such a critical part of Canada's future prospects, with the billions of dollars that have gone into this industry, it seems like it would very much calm the public's nerves and help us, as committee members, to understand how a containment is called a containment if there's actual radioactive material leaving the facility, and how treatment is called treatment when the water is in fact just as radioactive as when it was first leaked. I think those are basic understandings.
The questions I've put to the minister have been as clear and straightforward as I can make them. After hearing from the experts—which Mr. Trost unfortunately didn't, but he's since caught up with the notes, and that's good—I think today it behoves us to move to the vote and get on with things, if productivity is clearly....
Apparently Mr. Anderson wants that in, but I think the understanding is clear.
I wish we would move forward so we can discuss the rest of the engaging calendar that we have before us, which the clerk has done such an admirable job on.