First of all, the committee just agreed to a timetable for what we would be spending our time doing for the next several weeks. It's not just now that they're pre-empting this: with notice of motion, they had intended to pre-empt the committee's work all along anyway. I don't think that's good. Second, what they're not proposing is a review of all appointments at Transport Canada, and there are hundreds and hundreds of appointments there. Perhaps that means they endorse all of our appointments except for these two. We thank them for that.
What they are proposing is a selective endorsement of certain appointments. In my opinion, either this committee is going to vet all appointments or it will vet no appointments. By what means do you select certain appointments for vetting? Given the sheer volume of appointments at Transport Canada, this committee would be completely inundated and exclusively devoted to reviewing appointments. We would not be getting on with the other important work we have already agreed to do.
I think we should go with the timetable we've suggested for this committee's work. That's the much more valuable work here. We should not proceed with.... Again, this is for politics. This isn't for anything else. I'll be voting against the motion.