I didn't know I was going to be triggering a speech when I made my comment. All I was suggesting was that even the folks who are in favour of the bill have suggested that it's not perfect. You yourself just used the words “not perfect”. Maybe you want to take one extra meeting to go back and look at an amendment that makes the bill more “perfect”, from your viewpoint, before we pass it through committee. That's the only suggestion I was making. Even proponents of the legislation acknowledge that work needs to be done to fine-tune it. And we might want to take one meeting to do that before we come back. That was my only suggestion. I take issue with your phrase that “at worst it's redundant”. I think at worst it's significantly worse than redundant, but that's an argument for another day.
On December 14th, 2010. See this statement in context.