Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, colleagues. I trust we all had a great Father's Day celebration this past weekend.
Over the weekend, I reflected. It's really unfortunate that the debate got contentious last week. Up until this moment, I truly believe—and I think we will all agree—that the committee has been operating on a fairly cordial basis. It is my hope that we can get back on track.
We are not necessarily opposed to the NDP motion, but we are concerned about the precedent it might set when it comes to motions for the production of papers.
My colleague Xavier raised some really valid points at the last meeting about the wording I used in my amendment to the motion with regard to only taking studies that support the mandate. It was well received and very appreciated.
Colleagues, I would be willing to withdraw my amendment, and I would propose that we revert back to the original NDP wording but add the following clause as it was proposed by my colleague Mr. Rogers at the last meeting: “and that the production of documents be consistent with relevant legislation concerning confidentiality”.
If we can agree to vote in support of the NDP motion, that would be great. It would allow us to move forward with the very important business we have at hand. I hope we will receive support from the committee to go forward with this amendment.