Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased the parliamentary secretary spoke before I did. It was my understanding that it was to be Bloc, Liberal and Reform. At least that is the normal rotation. That is why I assumed that was what we were doing.
The parliamentary secretary in essence said many of the things I would have said. I thank him for saving me from digging through all of that.
The consideration for Nav Canada is to run a business guided by economic and financial considerations, with safety of paramount importance, regulated by the government.
However, one thing the parliamentary secretary said which I find exceedingly interesting was that he thought it inappropriate to list certain types of operators, small and large, and not address other groups such as private and recreational users, leaving them off the list. I find it interesting that the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport feels it is bad to create lists if some people are to be left off.
I suggest he review the blues on what he said and then read Bill C-33, which the government has just passed and which I believe he voted in favour of. That was the principal argument of the Reform Party.
Likewise, I suggest the Prime Minister of Canada read that list because now with this action dealing with the referendum question in Quebec he is stating how important it is to uphold the rule of law, as is the Minister of Justice. I would ask them why they did not think the same way when they brought in the bill on Pearson airport where the rule of law was clearly subverted.
We will not be supporting the Bloc motions on this for reasons that have been adequately stated by the hon. parliamentary secretary.
In essence, we feel these would politicize the mandate of Nav Canada, and that is clearly not the intent of the bill.