It applies to all committee members, but you nevertheless allowed Mr. Lemieux to go on. I would like to respond. In fact, it is not up to the government representatives on this committee to decide what our issue will be. We invited Ms. Verner not to talk about the contents of her action plan, but because we are preparing a report on the action plan. We wanted to ask her questions on the machinery of government which would be required for the coming action plan.
The opposition parties are not obliged to give their questions to the Conservative government. I know that the Conservative members are stuck with their prime minister, but that is not our case.
In her letter, Ms. Verner said that she had to respectfully decline the committee's invitation. However, she said yesterday that she had never done so. I want to make sure that this committee actually wants to work and study, and that it can hear from the witnesses it wants to invite. Mr. Lemieux mentioned that we wasted two hours this week, and that's true. However, committee members argued for two hours why she should not come, and they ultimately voted against the motion.
I believe that the minister is an adult and that she is able to answer questions. If there are questions she does not wish to answer, she is free to do so. But I don't think it is right for committee members to block the minister's appearance before the committee.
The same applies to Mr. Lord. We want to ask questions of Mr. Lord. I'll come back to the motion. When we will ask Mr. Lord questions, if he says he cannot answer because the matter is not addressed in his report, he will have to decide which questions he wants to respond to. However, people cannot block his appearance before the committee. He should therefore appear before the committee.