Let me make my point, Mr. Perkins.
I really think that in this instance, in this committee, we need to put partisan politics aside and say, look, folks, the clean-tech industry is a growing one. We need to help it grow. We need to make sure that small businesses, enterprises and entrepreneurial minds and ideas are able to thrive, are able to grow and are able to ultimately help not only progress Canada's economy but also deal with the climate-change challenges that Canada has been facing. It's not just Canada. The implications are worldwide.
Why are we picking on a minister who is trying to promote this industry here in Canada? Why are we trying to vilify an entire industry that is trying to thrive and set the stage for Canada? I think it's important for us to really reflect on the objectives of what this motion is really all about.
For example, I know that members opposite continue to call the SDTC a green slush fund. Well, the “green” in their term is important. Clean tech is relevant and important to Canada. It is relevant and important to the world. It is what our young people are innovating on and focusing on. I think we need to do justice to this growing industry.
That does not take away from the study that we've been conducting thus far. It does not take away from accountability or from transparency, but as I outlined earlier, by putting in these types of motions that have no purpose whatsoever other than to vilify the clean-tech industry, it sets a stage for what the future of the clean-tech industry will look like in Canada.
As I have said again and again in this committee, we have seen small businesses that are innovating and that are ensuring that we're progressing, that there's research, that there's development and that there's collaboration not just here in Canada but across the world. When we vilify an entire industry here in Canada, then we're doing Canada an injustice.
I can outline so many ways that does not help clean tech, that does not help Canadians and that does not help the people who are—