Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
I want to thank my colleagues for their time today and they're good questions. I'd implore that we vote in favour of this motion. There are reasonable grounds to suggest there is more information that's been brought to light that requires proper testimony and proper questioning, particularly of those witnesses who have not yet been present. I recognize there could be some debate among my Liberal and Conservative colleagues as to the list itself, but I implore you to ignore the obvious issues that could be presented, both in schedule and time, to having that many witnesses present. I do in fact think, for the purpose of good governance and our role here in public accounts, there is credible reason for us to invite these witnesses again.
I want to mention that the amendment I'm requesting is a friendly amendment. I think Mr. Genuis would agree that having a representative from TBIPS would be important to the continuation. That was part of the included information that was made by the testimony today. Ms. Daly did present, and fairly presented, a very credible and important assertion that there ought to be relevant investigations as to how groups like GC Strategies and others could even have been made a preferable contractor. I find credibility in that question and I think it's worth us asking TBIPS in order for us to better understand how, in fact, GC Strategies got through the door.
My hope is that we can find unanimous consent to do that.
Mr. Chair, I seek your advice as to whether or not we could do that by way of consent of the mover, rather than having to have an amendment and a debate.