Thank you very much.
I think it's unfortunate that there's not a willingness on behalf of the members of the government on this committee to expand the study in what I think is an inherently reasonable manner. I read the NSICOP report and have been following closely some of the other work, and it's stated very clearly, in fact—I'm paraphrasing from memory—that religiously motivated extremism is the greatest threat to Canadians.
I think it's incumbent upon all of us to ensure that, when we undertake these studies, the committee is not prejudging a conclusion. What I think is a very reasonable amendment put forward by Ms. Stubbs would ensure that the committee is addressing the issues facing Canadians in a manner that allows the committee to really get to the bottom of what is undoubtedly....
I think there is universal agreement on this committee that there are concerns that need to be addressed; however, with a narrow scope, I think we limit the work that the committee can do that would more effectively ensure what we can address what I think, and certainly hope, is at the heart of this motion.
I plan to support the amendment. I think it adds to the study proposed by the government, and it would ensure that it accomplishes, as I said, what I hope the objective is here.
For the committee to limit itself and prejudge its outcomes would be an unfortunate restriction. Again, I think it's unfortunate that it wasn't accepted as a friendly amendment, but because of the fact that we could do good work as a result, I hope members would consider supporting that.