Mr. Speaker, I would like to at least commend the Minister of Natural Resources for conducting himself in a dignified manner so far, unlike the Minister of Justice earlier today.
The minister is right to point out that there are points of agreement—or consensus, in his terms—and that those are around the very critically important nature of this legislation and the fact that the legislation needs updating.
Beyond that, what I am detecting very clearly in the course of this discussion over the 77th effort by the government to invoke time allocation in the House is some very substantive debate over the terms of the legislation. However, it is the points of disagreement that are emerging from this debate over time allocation that weigh against the minister's arguments in favour of time allocation today.
I would ask him to please tell the House if he, as a consensus seeker, agrees with me that this is in fact a substantive debate about the legislation that we are engaged in here and now in the House. Would he agree that the nature of this substantive disagreement over the terms of the legislation suggest that he should change his mind and withdraw the motion for time allocation on this bill?