I acknowledge in part the point that my Bloc colleague has made, that to suggest an amendment, as I have done--and will reintroduce following this, after we dispense with the proposed Bloc amendment--introducing the notion of “shall take reasonable steps” is to make it less compulsory. In other words, it doesn't apply in every single, solitary case, but I think it's stronger than “may”. Wouldn't we all acknowledge that there are many situations in which consultation would be an unreasonable thing to be expecting either of a civil society group or of the minister, given circumstances that require judgment?
So I acknowledge the point, but I guess I would ask for consideration of the kinds of situations in which overburdened civil society groups would say, “Oh my God, please can't we get on with it, let's not consult again.”
I'm sorry, I don't want to repeat myself.
The other thing is that somewhere lost in this, I think--I'm looking at Deepak here--I believe Deepak suggested the notion of adding “governments”. Although I'd be interested in hearing other views in case I'm missing something, I actually think it could be a good idea. I might be persuaded by someone else's argument, but at the moment I'm inclined to think that would sensible, and based on some discussion, I am prepared to consider it as a friendly amendment to my next proposed amendment.
For this reason, I actually think it should say something like “affected governments” or “appropriate governments”, because--and one of the most recent examples that came to my attention, and I'm sure it came to many other members' attention--when the Canadian Federation of Municipalities' international development representatives were on the Hill last week, they actually brought forward a concern about really tremendous work getting done, municipality to municipality, in various countries where actually the municipalities don't get appropriately consulted.
I may be jumping ahead of myself, but I didn't want us to lose sight of that proposed amendment. I tend to see it as an appropriate friendly amendment, but I would like to hear any counter arguments before I say I'm prepared to vote for it.