Mr. Chairman, I don't for the life of me understand why the Conservatives are refusing Mr. Bélanger's motion to have the discussion deferred. It's as if they were afraid to hear from the witnesses and to know what the impact will be on the rural regions. We saw how the Conservatives tried to prevent three paragraphs of the Ontario Appeals Court decision from being read. It took me 15 minutes to read those three paragraphs because every 60 seconds the Conservatives tried to stop me from reading a decision which greatly affects Mr. Bélanger's motion. The motion is to postpone discussion on a motion and an amendment which will, in all likelihood, have an impact on the postal services in rural areas.
I don't understand the Conservatives' reaction. They refuse to take responsibility, to do their duty, and to understand the ramifications of not deferring the discussions. If the discussions were to be pushed back, there would be no major impact and the committee members representing the Conservative Party would at least have the opportunity to read the decision and understand the impact it will have on the rural services.
Postponing the discussion is a sensible and responsible option. It's our duty. Any rushed decision would be irresponsible given the Court of Appeal's ruling and would have an impact on the rural regions.
There are Conservatives members of Parliament who represent rural regions in northern Alberta and they don't seem to be sensitive to what may occur if a decision was to be made in haste. They refuse to support Mr. Bélanger's motion. His motion is sensible and will help the representatives of rural regions to do their duty. They refuse to shoulder their own responsibilities, and to review a court decision affecting the rural regions. They refuse to hear from witnesses and to have a discussion on the impact on the rural regions. That's what I don't understand, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Bélanger and Mr. Laframboise both said that they don't understand why the Conservatives are in such a rush to make a decision which may have an unforeseen impact on their own ridings. That's what I find surprising. I think it's irresponsible. Mr. Bélanger's motion is appropriate. He wants deliberations delayed until we get the minister's report, a report, I might add, we've been waiting on for almost six months.
It doesn't take six months to write a report on these issues. The minister promised we would have the report late last year. And still we don't have it. The Conservatives tell themselves that they've heard the court's decision and that this is enough to justify ignoring the impact this may have on our own ridings. They just want the motion to be passed, regardless of the consequences. It's irresponsible.
Adopting Mr. Bélanger's motion would be a responsible thing to do as it would mean postponing the discussions. I'm sure Mr. Laframboise and Mr. Carrier will also support any motion to summon the witnesses we've been waiting to hear from for a number of weeks. Had this suggestion been made, we would have heard from witnesses from Canadian Pacific and had a discussion on rail network security. All they had to do was to agree to hear from witnesses and listen to them talk about the repercussions before debating this other motion.
Mr. Bélanger is sensible. He wants the deliberations to be put off until we've got the minister's response. If I've understood correctly, the Conservatives are telling us that the minister will never do his duty. That's the only thing we can take away from their rushed and irresponsible decision. The committee has the power to decide to hear from witnesses, that is its prerogative.
The Conservatives have never made an attempt to deal with the issue of witnesses appearing. I don't understand why they haven't. Nor do I understand why they're afraid of having the three paragraphs of the decision read out as it refers specifically to service in the rural areas. They were afraid Canadians would find out about the Appeals Court's decision. Why is that? That's difficult to explain. I'd like the Conservatives to explain themselves. Why are they so afraid of having these three paragraphs read into the record from today's meeting?
I don't understand why the Conservatives are in such a rush and why they fail to see the common sense behind Mr. Bélanger's motion. Every question Mr. Bélanger, Mr. Laframboise, and Mr. Carrier asked is valid. We want to be able to discuss this issue with witnesses who understand the matter and know about the impact these decisions may have. It's normal as parliamentarians to meet this responsibility. The court's decision affects the Conservative representatives' rural regions and yet they don't want to hear of it. They don't even want the decision to be read to the committee. I just don't get it.