The bill we're dealing with substitutes the U.S. regime for a no-fly list, and I would like to hear testimony from people on whether this will actually prevent people who are real threats from flying and whether it will solve the problem we have now. I have talked to someone who, very absurdly, was allowed to board a plane in Toronto, had a connecting flight, and when they reached the connecting point, they weren't allowed to board the next plane. Then they were told they couldn't board the plane to go back to where they started from. In the end it appears this person's name was simply being confused with another similar-sounding name. The person went through business losses, not just inconvenience, as a result of the non-functioning. So I'm happy to see the government acknowledging there are problems with our no-fly list, but I'd like to hear some testimony about whether the no-fly list we're going to have will be an improvement over the situation we actually have now.
I was going to say something, but I believe it's perhaps too inflammatory within the spirit of the debate today. I do believe the chair has been quite fair. I would just have to say I think we should all be careful about making reckless remarks and about possible attacks or actions against other members of Parliament. I'm going to phrase it that way.
What happened here in October affected all of us very directly, but not nearly as much as it affected the families of two members of our armed forces, who lost loved ones. I think we have to be careful in all of our discussions. I try to do so on my side and I know there's goodwill to do so on the other side.
Let me conclude my remarks, Mr. Chair, by reiterating what I've been saying, since the parliamentary secretary's chosen to do most of our negotiations in public. We have agreed to let this proceed in an expeditious manner, but under the condition that this committee take the time it needs to hold full hearings on this bill. I'm hopeful we will see some movement in that direction. Offering the official opposition 16 witnesses when we have more than 60 people wanting to appear is clearly not meeting the test of allowing Canadians who want to have their voices heard to have them heard before this committee.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.