Thank you, Chair.
I'm extremely grateful for that point, which allows me to make it obvious that we are talking about a motion regarding the privileges of the member for Peace River—Westlock. We had a point of order that was not a point of order from the member for Timmins—James Bay. He implied that we should not take this privilege motion so seriously because, based on his evaluation of the alleged level of interest, or not, of this particular member, his right to speak at committee wasn't actually so important.
In response to that, I am making the case that, in fact, the denial of the freedom of speech of the member for Peace River—Westlock is a grave and serious matter. First of all, his implication about the alleged lack of interest of this member in supporting the energy sector is outrageous and verifiably false. If the member for Timmins—James Bay is looking to identify members who have a lack of interest in issues related to the energy sector, he need only find a mirror.
The second point I was going to make was with regard to the broader issue of whether or not a member's interest in a particular topic—