I have two comments.
I have not read the report recently, but I plan to do so over the weekend.
From what I recall, I agree with the thrust of the report, the themes explored and the recommendations made, with two exceptions.
One of the recommendations concerns aid provided to drug addicts. I want to be certain that jurisdictions are being respected. I want to be clear on my position, in so far as Mr. Hanger is concerned. I have no problem whatsoever with the report's tone.
I'm not outraged that people hold different views. That's a good thing. However, can we agree on a common denominator, on the lowest common denominator?
On the drug issue, we have agreed on two or three common denominators. On the other hand, prostitution continues to be problem in major urban centres. This is something that falls under federal jurisdiction. More needs to be said about this problem.
Mr. Hanger, I don't think we're going to be able to sway you, as far as the tone of the report is concerned. I'll be making a presentation to my caucus on this issue. However, as an individual and as a parliamentarian, I can say that the philosophy underlying the recommendations and the tone of the report are quite consistent with my position on this matter.
In 2001, I headed up a party working group, From Anathema to Dialogue. Prostitution was a big problem at the time in Montreal. Our findings were similar to the ones contained in this report.
Although I still must make a presentation to my caucus, the Bloc Québécois agrees with the philosophical tone of this report.