I don't want to needlessly extend the debate, however, I'm going to repeat what I said last week: the reason I don't support my colleague's amendment is because that amendment would preclude a debate in the House of Commons.
The Parliamentary Budget Officer gave a presentation to us, here, that clearly shows that the pipeline purchase led to net losses that we'll never get back. However, the PBO was careful not to draw any political conclusions. I think that's really our job. That's why I want there to be a debate in the House, and I believe it's absolutely possible to hold that debate in the House and then continue the study.
There aren't many opportunities to discuss problems such as this, meaning a political project that's spiralled out of control and that involves a significant amount of public money. That's why I'd be prepared to vote on the amendment and the motion immediately. In any case, I think that, by trying to determine whether the House should debate the motion, the committee will have wasted the equivalent of three hours of debate in the House.