Thank you, Ms. Block.
I want to thank the witnesses for being here.
I want to take another look at an issue that's very important to me. I know the witnesses spent a lot of time preparing their appearance before us. However, I need to follow up on a situation that occurred here the week before the break. The issue is as important as the one we're discussing today. I'm talking about the Canada Infrastructure Bank. The issue, which we studied here for only an hour and a half, involves $35 billion in public funds. That's taxpayers' money.
Madam Chair, I'm following up on the issue because, when I talked about it, you weren't here, unfortunately. I think you were directly linked to my dissatisfaction regarding this issue. I can take the opportunity to summarize the situation.
On Thursday, May 4, you received, on our behalf, a letter from the Standing Committee on Finance. The letter indicated the following:
The Standing Committee on Finance is currently studying the subject matter of Bill C-44, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 22, 2017 and other measures. Please find attached a series of motions adopted by the Standing Committee on Finance on Wednesday, May 3 ...
I'll skim over this part of the letter. It went on to say the following:
The motions that were adopted also invite your Committee, if it deems appropriate, to provide us with recommendations ...
Madam Chair, I want to specify that I'm currently talking about the motion I tabled. My colleagues across the way closed the debate on this motion, and I want to resume it. As the clerk explained, the second part of the motion was admissible.
Do people still need a copy of the letter?
If not, may I continue, Madam Clerk?