Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Before I talk any more about the bill, I would like to say something. The Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security has just been through two extremely tough weeks. We have heard from 48 witnesses, including the Minister of Justice and the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, all at sometimes impossibly tough hours of the day.
The days have been very long—even today's meeting began early this morning—not only for us, but also for our staff. All of the members here are always accompanied by staff, interpreters, people who take care of feeding us and people who make sure the committee runs smoothly. I would like to take a moment to thank all of them, because, frankly, their work over the past couple of weeks has been extraordinary.
I also want to thank the people who are following the debate, either here—since there are still some people in the room—or at home. I'm sure that some people are very interested in the whole debate surrounding Bill C-51. I want to thank them for paying attention. Without those people who care about what's happening, our work as parliamentarians would not serve much purpose. Regardless of our political views on a legislative measure like Bill C-51, it is good to raise questions and concerns, to share our point of view and to pay attention to what public opinion has to say about a piece of legislation as delicate as Bill C-51. I wanted to thank everyone for that.
Of course, I cannot hide that am disappointed this evening. We have worked really, really hard to try to improve the parts of the bill that we thought needed some improvement. As everyone knows, after carefully studying the bill and after taking the time to look at every part of the bill, the NDP has decided to vote against it at second reading. There were many parts of this bill that we didn't want to touch because we thought they should be removed altogether. We will continue working on that. We believe that many of the bill's provisions are a direct attack on Canadians' civil liberties and basic rights. I am not prepared to make any concessions on that.
The Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness has already said this in the House of Commons and here before the committee. I completely agree with him that civil liberties and public safety should always go hand in hand. He is quite right.
In this bill, however, I could not find what he was talking about. I learned last Friday that the Conservatives were going to amend the bill. The minister also said that he was going to let the committee do its work and that he would be open to amendments. I must say, I was looking forward to some real openness this time, in order to be able to strike a balance between civil liberties, basic rights and public safety. Personally, I was not satisfied with the results, unfortunately.
I will continue to oppose this bill. I have principles. I know that many other people around this table also have principles. We do not all have the same principles. I stick to my principles. We all want the same thing: to combat terrorism and radicalization by passing the best possible legislation; however, we all have different ways of achieving that objective.
Personally, my principles have not changed: I would like to see greater civilian oversight, adequate budgets for our police services and good eradication strategies on the ground. I will continue to fight for these rights and for my basic rights.
Thank you.