I thought that the members opposite, when they spoke, all agreed that we needed to get some people in here to talk about this thing, whether it works or it doesn't work, as opposed to “My idea”, or individual ideas on that side. Why would we be moving ahead on this motion until we have called some of those people before the committee, people who can talk to us from a professional perspective?
I mean, I still hear from across the table the same arguments, that this is some kind of gun control. To understand the system, we need to bring people forward.
The motion talks about hunters. This isn't just about hunters. It's about the safety of Canadians.
Mrs. Freeman, with all due respect, I have as much concern about women as you do. All of our people do. We have all worked in that area. I agree with my friend Mr. Norlock that we did a terrible disservice to women for the first 100 years of this country in domestic violence. I think we're doing a far better job, and there are things we can still do, but you know what? It doesn't change this. Instead of us having some sort of a reaction here, without having experts, we're doing a disservice to all Canadians.
I heard from the members opposite that they thought it was a good idea. I'm wondering why we've changed in the last few minutes, and why we want to go ahead with this motion without having some experts come forward.