Mr. Speaker, I am not surprised by the answer. We see that our colleagues across the way, who were not on the committee, have not heard everything that people wanted. Most of those who appeared before us wondered what the point was of trying to agree on a bill now.
I am therefore disappointed. The government holds a vote on a motion on distinct society and what does that really mean? We have always said that we will achieve absolutely nothing by holding a vote on the motion. In the end, the government is making grand promises and telling us how very deeply they care about distinct or unique society, call it what you will.
But this means that it is passing wall-to-wall legislation that does not reflect the real situation, specific to Quebec. This bill shows, once again, the government's inflexibility. It was a test the government could have passed, but one that it is going to fail. The people of Quebec, and students in particular, who know what is going on and are not stupid, know that the real reason for this bill is to increase the government's visibility, to the detriment of what happens in the education sector with student funding.
Students would have liked there to be a better form of management of the funding than by a private foundation. This concern is shared by almost all the witnesses that appeared before us. The auditor general challenged the transparency of this foundation that will be managing $2.5 billion. I think this money should have gone back into the social transfer to the provinces for education, health and welfare.