Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I, in turn, support the comments of my Conservative colleague Mr. Scheer, who has concerns with the amendment that is being proposed.
I have had occasion to table motions for the production of documents before, and I have sometimes been very unpleasantly surprised at the outcome. I recently made an access to information request. The committee made the same request, but did not get the same documents. This is surprising, since these requests are supposed to be answered in a comprehensive manner.
We have made other requests, and we have been told that the document requested is confidential. That in itself is not a problem. However, 80% of the content of that document was redacted. So this procedure is a bit difficult to understand. We need more explanation as to why things sometimes happen this way.
I, for one, rely on the members of the committee to protect confidential or sensitive information that should not be made public, if at all. I am quite comfortable with that.
That being said, for the benefit of the public, as much information as possible should be made public. There is a framework that can be followed and trusted. I trust my colleagues around the table. I think that transparency is essential, but unfortunately, we have seen too little transparency from the federal government. In this case, large amounts of money are at stake. I don't see what would prevent us from getting the real information about the money that is being spent and that belongs to the taxpayers, after all.
Mr. Chair, I mentioned this earlier, but I see that time is running out and I wonder if we will have to reinvite some witnesses. One witness in particular was almost unable to speak. Perhaps we will need to invite him to an additional meeting, unless you intend to extend the time for today's meeting.