Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I want to join in with those who say that our parliamentary privilege is obviously violated when we are presented with a motion about which we are not adequately informed. We avoided questioning witnesses from Canada Post or from the postal workers' union about this issue, because of the labour dispute going on at the time. We had no clear idea of the consequences of the decision that we would have to make.
I would like the remailers to describe the impact of a decision that we might have to make due to this motion. I would also like to know what Canada Post intends to do with legislation that grants it exclusive privileges, as confirmed by the Ontario Court of Appeal. I know that this is not the Quebec Court of Appeal, but I think that the Ontario Court is equally important. Given all this, I can hardly go along with a motion that goes against a decision made by the Court of Appeal. I think that we could reasonably delay adopting the motion so that we can hear witnesses and clarify the issue.
Let me raise another issue. Earlier, it was suggested that we should hear the witnesses a half an hour later than scheduled. I note that we have been discussing for nearly an hour. I think that we should wrap up the discussion and make our decision later after taking time to reflect.