Mr. Speaker, let us be clear. What the minister is speaking about is a legal obligation based on something that does not exist. There is no possibility for any Canadian, for any court, to look at the document or instrument from which arises this supposedly existing obligation.
The truth is that instead of fulfilling his duties and role as guardian of cultural heritage the minister has yielded to pressure from an American lobbyist. It does not bode well for the future.
How can the minister justify his refusal to cancel this agreement given the fact this government and this Prime Minister have already cancelled a duly completed contract concerning Pearson international airport? Why has his courage failed him in this case?