Mr. Speaker, I would suggest to my colleague from the Reform Party that if he wants to understand what we say, he only has to listen. I think this would be a good thing, since he does not often listen to our arguments because he is too busy preparing his while we develop ours. And this has been going on for the last two and a half years.
Thus, I repeat that the amendments put forward by the government do not in any way correct the deficiencies of the initial bill, that is, Bill C-100, which has been renamed Bill C-15, and that the secretary of state told us tall tales when he appeared before the committee. The secretary of state told us that his government did not intend to infringe upon the securities industry. Since then, we have been able to refine our analysis. Bill C-15 was even compared with the old Bill C-100. Then, there was the speech from the throne which spoke clearly of restoring a Canadian securities commission.
So, this is my conclusion on the ten amendments. We will reject these amendments because they do not meet any of our expectations. These purely cosmetic amendments only add up to commas and periods and were put forward this morning with only one hour prior notice to try to destabilize the opposition and the debate on
this bill and create confusion in the population and also force us to concentrate our comments on these ten proposals that are rather trivial considering the seriousness of the bill.