Mr. Speaker, I too would like to speak to the bill and to the amendment just briefly.
I could not help but notice during the last few minutes some of the comments across the way delving into the political garbage bucket like the hon. whip for the party opposite often does. I do not want to hold up the bill because we are on record as explaining why the bill is poorly designed. It is without scientific rationale. It is a knee-jerk reaction in support of friends of the Liberal Party. That has already been well documented.
I repeat for the record that today's activities again are an example of how the party opposite does not have any kind of political agenda or legislative agenda that Canadians and Quebecers can grasp on to with enthusiasm. This is more time filling, political time wasting on behalf of a government that seems bereft of any new ideas. Its idea of change is that it is already doing it. It just does not cut.
The bill should not pass. The amendment does not address the problems within the bill. Decisions should not be made in Canada based on what we felt like when we got up in the morning. There should be some scientific facts behind it.
The government quotes studies and tests. On and on it goes. It will not submit in the House the tests it quotes from. The reason it cannot ban MMT is that the health department says it is not a hazard. The reason it cannot be banned outright is that there is no scientific reason for it. All the government can do is prevent its interprovincial trade and prevent its importation at a time when the United States of America will go ahead. The court has approved its use in the United States.
It is a shame the government cannot come up with some better idea or legislative agenda that would address the issues of importance to Canadians instead of the time fillers we have been dealing with today.