As has been said, there's smoke and there's fire here. There's obviously something very wrong going on.
That said, this is being looked at by the ethics committee. It's being looked at by the public accounts committee. It's being looked at by the Auditor General and the RCMP. I mean, I think this is a pattern of what ends up.... I think it's very important to look into this to get the answers, but it ends up that there are four committees doing the same work, calling the same witnesses and getting the same answers.
It's important to get to the bottom of it, but there comes a point when you're wasting time and resources here in committees and Parliament, and I'd think that when you have a situation like this, one that is clearly an operations problem and clearly an ethical problem, it's more in the ambit of ethics and public accounts or government operations than it is for the science and research committee. I'm not in support of moving ahead with studying this.
I'll wait with interest to see what is found in the other committees. I'm getting texts from my colleagues who are studying this at this very minute in other committees. I would just say to let those committees do their work. I think that's important. Piling on things is just like what we were dealing with in my other committee, the international trade committee, where the Conservatives wanted that committee to look into the ArriveCAN scandal when, again, it was being looked at by two or three other committees and it's not really an international trade thing but an ethics thing. It's a scandal that is being dealt with by our public accounts. It's not what this committee should be looking into, or the international trade committee, for that matter.
I think it's important and I think we as a Parliament should look into this, but I think it would not be fruitful for us to spend that time.