I think this is a little different, first of all, from most committees. The transport committee that we've been operating on has been very effective this last session in getting two bills through. We did it on a very similar amendment, but not what has been proposed by Mr. Bigras. In fact, the last environment committee of the session before was very ineffective because I found that the voice of northern Alberta, notwithstanding Ms. Redman, was not heard and I was not able to question witnesses.
This is not about my presenting evidence. This is about my questioning witnesses as to what I know from my particular area, just as you know things from your particular area that I have no idea of, just as Mr. Godfrey does for his area that I have no idea of, and the witnesses can provide evidence. This is a government bill that we are proposing, and we should have the ability to respond to your questions to the witnesses so that we have the opportunity....
This is a democracy, the last I checked. I'd sure like to think so. I am here to represent my constituents, and hopefully, Ms. Redman, you are as well. I think we're here to represent all Canadians.
There is a unique perspective from each area of our country, because it is so large. Everyone should have an opportunity to question witnesses before anyone has an opportunity to speak twice and question the witnesses. We're all trying to contribute to the piece of legislation that is going to benefit Canadians, and all of us should have that opportunity to question witnesses before another person has a double opportunity to represent their constituents twice. It's not fair. It's simply not a fair system and we need to have a fair system here.
Canadians are watching us and Canadians want to see this Parliament work. I think we all know that, and that's why the subcommittee is not going to work. We all need to have an opportunity to put forward questions to the witnesses so that we can show our perspectives, and I think the government needs to respond.