Mr. Speaker, what is striking about the intervention is that the hon. member will not deal with the tough underlying issue. He will not confront the question. I put it simply. When should governments pay compensation? Should they pay cash compensation to those who are harmed through the medical system not through anyone's fault, but because of the risks inherent in the medical system? The member will not answer that question.
He accuses me of having a legal analysis as if it is some sort of condemnation. The Prichard committee in 1980 was not a legal analysis. It was made up of health care experts who understood health policies. Their recommendation was to do exactly what ministers have done in this case, which is good public policy.
The member will not confront the question because he knows where it leads. It leads to the conclusion that this motion is ill-founded and inappropriate. The very person who moved it, the hon. member for Macleod, has conceded that it is without foundation. He has conceded that if there is no fault there should be no cash payment. The history of this matter shows that he has just cut the ground out from under his own motion.