Again, I should make it clear that my comments have nothing to do with the merits or substance of the particular statement, but rather its inclusion in this bill. It seems to be a non-sequitur in the context of what this bill is supposed to be about, and what it's supposed to achieve.
I don't have a particular problem with the statement, and I've also heard it said countless times. I just don't see how it relates to the birthplace of Confederation and the Confederation Conference that took place in 1864.