I would be interested in having Mr. McKay comment more generally on this.
Quite frankly, I'm a little perplexed, Mr. Chair. I don't understand why the Conservatives are bringing this forward at the beginning of the meeting, when we have four witnesses who are waiting and have a lot to offer to the committee as a whole. We have an important study. That being said, I'll have some amendments to offer a little later on.
I find the idea of the study that Mr. Calkins proposed is a good one. I think it's important. There's no doubt that the committee could be well informed by a study of this nature. The language, though, is completely inappropriate for a parliamentary committee. I think Mr. McKay spoke to that as well.
Here we have a situation where the government is thrusting this at us right at the beginning of a meeting, trying to push aside four esteemed witnesses who have come forward and have a lot to offer this committee, with language that is clearly inappropriate. I'm at a loss to understand why the government is proceeding in this way. It seems to me to be entirely inappropriate. This is a study that obviously has some benefits, and yet is proceeding in a very clearly partisan and inappropriate way.
Underneath all of the verbiage that is inappropriate for this motion, I think his intention is good. I'm disappointed that the intention is being masked by inappropriate language.