Mr. Speaker, I want to commend my colleague, who is so good at explaining rules that can be rather dry.
I think it is admirable how he raised the fact that a review in committee might help us understand what could have led someone to twice deliberately break a basic rule, to tell the truth in the House.
The hon. member made an analogy to driving a car and being stopped by a police officer who notices that the driver was clearly speeding. Do hon. members not think that we must all tell the truth in the House?
I could say that I spend my time in my neighbourhood watching letter carriers with their flashlights delivering mail in the evening. I see that quite often. I have seen that at least two or three times. That would not be true. However, that would not be as serious as what happened in this case, where the member misled Parliament because he did not have a stronger argument to justify these changes in the rules.