As I understand it, the Liberals do not intend to vote on the motion today.
Mr. Chair, you will tell me how to proceed, but as vice-chair, I think we can plan our work. I'm saddened by this situation. I think the next meeting should be on the issue at hand, until it is resolved. That's just a suggestion. If the Liberals decide to filibuster, that's their prerogative. In a democracy, that's inappropriate, but it happens.
I would just like to come back to one point. Mr. Sarai, you didn't hear what the veterans had to say. It's not their style to raise their hand and say that they are not in favour of a monument.
Mr. Casey, you are such a smart man, yet you're going back to the survey again. The government itself recognized that the survey had no value. You continue to say that it has value, that 10,000 people participated in the survey. If you don't believe the people at Leger, who completely demolished it, that's not a problem for me.
I am going to talk to you about a Veterans Affairs Canada document from Amanda Kelly, a manager we all know, who, in an email dated November 17, 2021, raised a point about the survey.
Look me in the eye, Mr. Casey.
She pointed out that the survey did not ask respondents to rank their choice and that, depending on the respondents' interpretation of the question, they may or may not have chosen more than one model. There is no way of knowing which one they preferred or to what extent they preferred one over the other.
After all, it is someone from the department, a manager in an important position, who is telling us that in black and white. This email is part of the documents that were sent in. So you see the relevance of asking for documents to be able to see things clearly, as the process is really not clear. So there is someone at Veterans Affairs Canada who is going against the survey you are defending so staunchly.
At a previous meeting, I asked the minister if she could show me that at least one female veteran had responded to the survey. You remember as well as I do, since you listen to the minister a lot, that she said she was unable to do so. In fact, there was nothing that distinguished gender from the other data or values.
Earlier, you alluded to the fact that people from the national capital had been approached. Statistically, that doesn't make sense, either. They don't account for 25% of the population.
You talked about francophones. Although they represent 22% of the population, they accounted for 12% of the survey respondents. I would rather call it a pseudo-survey. You can't even call it a survey.
You don't believe what I'm saying. What the opposition is asking for in terms of documents is not relevant. You want to drag out the work, you don't want to hear from veterans in the short term. That's your choice.
Once again, someone from the department, someone in a senior position, is telling us that this makes no sense, but go ahead, continue to defend your survey.
That's all, Mr. Chair.