Mr. Chair, this is absolutely unbelievable.
The three-minute rule was already unprecedented. This is something that has never happened in parliamentary history. This is a serious bill with serious flaws. It is absolutely unbecoming of any member to even think that within sixty seconds we can deal with the complexity of legislation. Even within three minutes it's been difficult for members to understand what the implications and consequences of their decisions are.
Mr. Chair, as you know, you do have the ability to adjourn a meeting, if the meeting simply is not...and if any one member decides that the rules of order that have been imposed are unreasonable. I would suggest that Mr. Eyking would prefer to withdraw his motion rather than put us in a situation where what is already untenable becomes absolutely irresponsible. This has never happened before in the history of House committees. Never before has a bill this complex been rammed through with so many implications. I mean, the screw-ups around voting through amendments that have profound implications for the independent remanufacturers, as we've seen, are consequences that will continue with us for many years to come. This is absolutely irresponsible and it should not be considered by the committee. If it's considered by the committee, then what we are saying is that we are not going to respect the proper parliamentary procedure and we're going to try to ram this through in one day. This is not in Canadians' interests, and most Canadians would disagree profoundly with this. We're dealing with the complexity of the bill.
I would ask Mr. Eyking to withdraw his motion because it is absolutely the most irresponsible thing that I have heard in my two and a half years on the Hill. It is unbecoming any parliamentarian to try to muzzle members of Parliament. We already have a muzzling that's without precedent. Why doesn't he make it five seconds? Why doesn't he just go the whole route? I mean, why not? If we're not going to seriously consider the bill anyhow, Mr. Chair, why not make it two and a half seconds? Why don't we just assume that we have no due diligence or responsibility at all?
As I mentioned, a member of the lumber industry asked me last night why the Liberals are assisting in this. He said, I thought they were opposed to the softwood sellout. Very clearly, with what we're seeing today, this is not the case; there is as much support from the Liberals as there is from the Conservatives. People in British Columbia, who are strongly opposed to this sellout, will be able to take the proper conclusions based on that.
I would ask the member to withdraw his motion.
