Mr. Speaker, I am becoming a little concerned about the insinuation that is being attributed to the second part of the motion, which is that the standing committees on foreign affairs and national defence hold joint meetings with officials and ministers, et cetera.
The fact is that committees have been operating. In fact, ministers have met with their respective committees.
The Minister of Transport was before the transport committee to talk about important issues like airline and airport safety. The Minister of National Defence and all his staff were before the national defence committee. The Minister of Foreign Affairs was before the foreign affairs committee. The Minister of Health has already dealt very quickly with other aspects. The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration has been before that particular committee.
The House has been working. The committees have been working.
The genesis of this particular part of the motion comes from something that happened during the gulf war where parliament did establish a couple of joint committees that met on a daily basis with the military.
The membership should clearly understand or maybe admit that this is not a war against another country that will be over in a period of time. This is a campaign against global terrorism that could take years.
Although I think everyone can agree with the first paragraph, which is, first, to condemn the terrorists and second, to support our military, the lack of specifics about these committees meeting frequently with military and ministers and tying up these people over an indefinite period of time, which could be years, gives me great concern.
I hope the member could at least put on the record what the intent is so that should I vote in favour of this I understand what the intent of a very wishy-washy second part is.