Yes, of course.
Before responding, I would like to highlight what Mr. Reid brought to our attention. We didn't have a lot of time to discuss and analyze this bill. We were really down to the wire. I would like to come back to that. What should our time frame be to debate a bill and determine whether it is constitutional? I had barely 24 hours to think about it, and I don't think that's enough. I know that it's an exceptional situation, that there was the decision of the Speaker of the House of Commons and all that. But we didn't have time to really think properly. Having said that, I would like to come back to this a little later, Mr. Chair. So we could talk about the time frames we expect when a bill is presented to us.
To come back to Mr. Dion's question, the freedom of association is constitutional and fundamental in Canada. Unions must have the right to benefit from all the opportunities to properly represent their members. It's the law of trusts, in the end. It's as if they were trustees. Their responsibilities are extremely heavy. But they must do everything they can to properly represent their members, the same way as members must do everything they can to represent the constituents in their ridings. We cannot keep them from doing that.
I would say that it's the same as tackling the law of privilege. Of course, the law of privilege isn't the same thing; it concerns elected members. All the same, the unions must represent their members, which is even recognized in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. I don't want to encroach on that freedom, and I also don't want to encroach on those responsibilities. It's a basic freedom.