I'll continue, then. I'm not going to speak to the amendment here. Let me just speak to the motion overall.
Again, Mr. Desjarlais has done his best to reach a compromise. The challenge, of course, is that we continue to focus on a summons. That, for me, is a situation whereby this committee creates a scenario that establishes the kind of precedent that sets us back in a very unfortunate way.
Chair, let me simply remind you—you know this, but it's important to put it on the record once again—what this committee's mandate is all about. I'll make it clear and read directly from our mandate letter—not our mandate letter, but our overall mandate. The mandate of the public accounts committee is to “review...and report on the Public Accounts of Canada and all reports of the Auditor General of Canada”.
Where in the motion that Mr. Genuis has put forward are we debating anything that relates to the overall mandate of the committee? I don't see it. I only see a motion that's come out of left field and that does not push us in any direction that would allow for the mandate of this committee to come to life.
It's problematic from start to finish. Again, there's nothing in here about a certain foundation or any particular charity. The Auditor General has no role in any of this. The Auditor General has emphasized that she doesn't have a role when it comes to the governance of particular organizations like the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation, but here we are, discussing and debating a matter that we don't need to be debating. Unfortunately, that's exactly what we're doing.
I have a challenge with that. I think members on this side have a challenge, as well, with what's happened here.
Is Mrs. Shanahan on the speaking list?