Thank you, Madam Chair.
I think, Chair, that we've done a lot of good work together. I think usually.... I mean, certainly making assumptions that you thought we would....
I think it goes back to process. What is the process? We've had a process, and in it we have discussed studies very collegially in subcommittees. Especially as somebody who only has one seat at this table—I don't have a lot of power on this table and I'm not delusional—I think that part of the reason was to make sure that we weren't playing partisan games and that we were putting forward the best studies we could.
I know that because of the subcommittee, I was able to work with all the parties with support of and in solidarity with women and with diverse-gendered people, knowing that this is the only place in the House of Commons that actually focuses on women's issues. I got the red dress study and I also got the study connecting increased violence against indigenous women and girls and resource extraction. That was agreed on across all party lines.
We have always done that. We don't have vicious debates in subcommittee. We look at the issues of the day and we discuss them. Part of the reason that it's worked is the process. Clearly, going forward with different processes doesn't seem to be working. I know who suffers for that, and they are the people we're fighting for, so this is very much on a point of order.
I question if our priority is shifting. I don't want to make assumptions. I do know what we're going into: It's from fighting for women and diverse-gendered people across party lines in a non-partisan way to getting ready for an upcoming election.
I think that in this committee, out of all the committees, we could actually get something done. We completed nine studies. Those studies have saved lives. I'm speaking to you as a human being, because I know that you're a good human being and that your role is critical in the process to make sure that we can ensure those things keep happening.
Thank you, Chair.