Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I want to thank my colleagues for another important motion.
I think there are three principles for me that we should answer in this discussion today. One is—which I accept—the principle that committees are masters of their own will. In particular, issues that are the most important to the members are the most important to me, as a matter of fact, given our collegiality.
We just passed a motion that I think is a good one. It calls on the CRA to conduct an investigation. However, I take the point the Bloc Québécois is making with regard to the great amount of time that report would take.
I'm more partial to an independent investigation by the CRA for this kind of work. It's dealing with, in particular, very detailed financial statements, I'm sure. I would prefer that the CRA investigate that. I'm sure all of you have agreed to that.
However, to understand it more correctly, Mr. Genuis, the work that we would be conducting in these meetings would be to see whether these members—or at least the members who agree to come here—have some kind of knowledge of these donations in particular. Do you think that would be the nature of the questions we'd be asking? Or would it be more in relation to how they operate, similar to ethics? What would be our objective here? Would it be to narrowly look at the $125-million taxpayer-funded payments, or could we make that broader in some respect? I need some clarity as to what we would be doing in this particular setting versus what the CRA would be doing.