First, I appreciate my colleague for bringing forward this motion. We all have similar concerns, which is why we're doing a study on it.
We're at eight studies, I think, or are we at nine? Maybe. It feels like it.
My concern is that we're now getting motions here at committee that should be in the study so that we can make really good recommendations, and I think some of those recommendations should certainly be about how the Governor General's spending taxpayers' dollars.
My concern is now we're getting a lot of motions pre-empting the very studies we're doing. I'm not saying that I'm opposed to them at all. In fact, I'd like to learn more.
My colleague who moved this motion was in government. Stephen Harper appointed the Right Honourable David Johnston not once, but twice, and didn't do this cut. I'd like to know why that didn't happen under the Conservative government. Why is it this number? Where did this arbitrary number come from? I'd like to understand that.
Shouldn't this be something that is included in the study so that we can make some good policy decisions and recommendations moving forward? That's something that I'd like to hear from my colleague, whom I respect a lot. I just want some answers on that.
I appreciate her bringing this forward.