I am smiling, Mr. Speaker, because a twist in parliamentary procedure has my colleague from the NPD supporting a motion put forward by the Bloc Quebecois while opposing the bill. Or else this is an aspect of the NDP philosophy that escapes me.
Our position is clear: we are in favour of Bill C-35. I do not want to get into a long speech on this bill. As you know, we support any legislation that will provide better safeguards for Canadian industries.
We are currently debating Motion No. 1, dealing with the possibility of initiating an investigation. When a complaint is received, it must be determined whether the information may be shared or not, for the purpose of establishing the validity of the complaint.
There is a risk in checking, as the Bloc Quebecois pointed out in committee; it can alert competitors across the country and abroad. The Bloc Quebecois tried on several occasions to convince the committee to approve this recommendation.
We still have concerns. In the various laws and regulations governing the antidumping tribunal, there are two provisions outlining a number of safeguards designed to ensure that complaints will not be discussed too openly.
We have strong reservations about this. From the reports, I gather that the hon. member for Repentigny approved clause 15, albeit with dissent on this recommendation. I am not sure that this change will improve Bill C-35. We may be taking something away from the tribunal or the government to allow an investigation to go further. Still, the complainant would be protected under two provisions contained in the legislation.
I will get in touch with my colleague from Repentigny. We tried to reach him today, but unfortunately he too is very busy. For the time being, we will be voting against Motion No. 1.