I remember that motion very well. The objective is to have a reduced quorum. I don't really have a problem with the five members, including the two from the opposition. But I don't agree with mentioning the government, and I will tell you why. We are talking about five members, two of which must be from the opposition. The government members could easily not show up at the committee if they didn't like some of the witnesses. The meeting would then automatically be cancelled. If five members are supposed to be present, it is the government's responsibility to ensure that its members are there. The meeting is public and it is called by the chair, who is a member of the government. With a reduced quorum, no votes can be held. You only hear from witnesses and gather information.
Nothing has ever stopped the government from sending its members to committee. However, it could choose not to do so, which would automatically lead to the meeting being cancelled. That's why we are not talking about the government. The idea behind having two members of the opposition is to prevent the government from calling a meeting with witnesses when the opposition cannot be there. This ensures that the opposition is present. And it is up to the government to just send its members to committee. That's its guarantee. The quorum is five members and at least two must be from the opposition. At no point in time does this prevent the government from sending its members to committee.
In terms of the quorum, the required presence of government members has never been discussed in the past. The issue has always been the two members of the opposition in order to make sure the opposition was present at committee. It is up to the government to send its own members to committee. Otherwise, it would be too easy. We have already seen meetings being cancelled that way. I don't mean to be casting stones, but the members were not the absent ones in those cases, it was the chair who didn't show up. And we had invited people from Manitoba. Their flights had already been paid. The witnesses were all here for the meeting. As you well know, a war broke out because of that. I am saying that the motion is fine the way it is. I have no objection to talking about five members, including two members of the opposition. But I definitely do not agree with what is being proposed. That goes against what we want to do and what we need. So I would ask that my dear friend Mr. Lauzon withdraw it.