Thank you. We would like to support this point of order and the motion to rescind the previous motion based on the new information that is before us and particularly the point that was raised by the law clerk noting that:
At this time, the proceedings of this legal action are still in their preliminary stage, and the hearing for the certification of the class-action will only occur at the end of the year. It is yet unknown if the courts will allow the claim to proceed on the merits, which will take another few years. Therefore, there['s] little chance that the Committee's evidence will prejudice the potential legal action, and as such there would be no violation of the sub judice convention.
I'd also like to note that one of the women who was to come forward came out to the media in British Columbia last week and spoke about how her voice was being silenced and how her right to be heard was being taken away from her. We now know based on the legal opinion that there is no reason to reject the testimonies of these women, certainly not at this stage.
I'd like to pick up on a point mentioned by my colleague Ms. Sgro about our fundamental duty as members of Parliament. We're here to do our due diligence. We're here to listen—and certainly as part of this committee we're here to listen to the voices of women who have gone through these horrible experiences. We are here to create recommendations based on what they bring forward, what all witnesses bring forward, and it is unconscionable to even imagine that we can claim to be doing the proper work in this committee and as part of this research project without hearing from the women from the RCMP. As we know, we have every right to do so based on the legal decision that has been put forward to us.