I believe I recall my friend Maxime trying to bring a motion to this committee that would require things at hand to be given in writing in advance. I believe we voted it down for the reason that when these types of issues come up, they're to be dealt with using the resources that we have—that is, interpretation.
I find it a bit strange that some of the folks who, if I recall correctly, voted against Maxime's motion—and I was one of them, because I wanted to maintain the ability to do things at hand—now want to use the idea that things must be in writing. The whole purpose of voting down the Bloc's motion, in my opinion, was to allow for these general discussions to happen in ways that are particular to the matters at hand, and I fully support that this is a matter at hand. I will even go further and say that if the government continues to use cabinet confidentially as a lock and key to all government information pertinent to the public, we're going to have problems with the so-called open-by-default nature of this government.
I support the motion, and I believe that if we look back at the record, we would see that many of the people who voted against the Bloc's motion did so on principles that my colleague is now against.