Thank you, Madam Chair.
I simply want to explain the objective of my motion. The study we are beginning today is vague. We have not defined clear objectives. We don't have specific points upon which to focus our study. We thus run the risk of simply touching on the many aspects involved in aviation safety.
Take our study on railway safety as an example. The committee had determined four key points upon which to focus our study so that we could do effective and useful work.
We have to do the same thing if we want this study to be credible. I reread the discussions we had in committee about air safety, as well as the notices and motions that were presented.
The motion I am putting forward would allow us to focus our study on points that are essential for air safety and the safety of passengers. In addition, it incorporates Ms. Block's motion concerning CATSA. It also integrates Mr. Berthold's motion concerning security screenings for employees following the worrisome revelations broadcast on the J.E. program.
It is important that Canadians trust our security system in airports, and that they be safe in all Canadian airports, not only the one in Montreal.
Mr. Berthold's motion is only about one issue discussed in the media. It is important that this issue be the subject of a rigorous and complete study by the members of this committee. That is the reason why my motion does not focus strictly on the Montreal-Trudeau Airport. Our committee has to study the entire system.
Of course, we could ask representatives of the Montreal-Trudeau Airport to appear before the committee to explain their situation. Since this is an issue that concerns both the opposition and the government, I am convinced that my colleagues will support my motion so that we can undertake a serious study with a well-defined framework, and with all of the rigour we need for an issue as crucial as aviation safety.
Thank you, Madam Chair.