Thank you very much, Chair.
I've heard the views of colleagues.
In the amendment in front of me, here's the change that it calls for to Mr. McCauley's substantive motion: “And, as requested by the committee in its Report Number 27 asking the Canada Revenue Agency to investigate the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation”.
That work is happening. As a committee, we had our first meeting to look at matters that we agreed to look at.
Just so we're on the same page, because this amendment refers to report 27, there were two motions passed that are relevant.
The first was:
That the committee calls on the Canada Revenue Agency to investigate the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation and that the committee believes it is in the public interest to prioritize this investigation.
and
That, given the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation received a $125-million taxpayer funded payment in 2002, the committee hold two hearings into the situation at the Trudeau Foundation and report it's findings to the House, and that the witnesses will not include elected members of parliament or Trudeau Family members.
That's my understanding of what we agreed to. It's not just my understanding, but that's on the public record. We had started that.
With regard to the motion introduced today, we are not debating it in substance, but we are looking at the amendment. Regardless, the point stands that we are off track. We could be doing the work of this committee, but instead we're looking at matters that are very problematic, and they've been mentioned already.
With that in mind, I move that we adjourn debate, Mr. Chair.