Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise to speak to the amendment before us. It may be the most important one.
The legislation needs to come to the House to be scrutinized by the people who were elected to represent the people of Canada. We have already seen this done in Bill C-68, the gun registration bill, and it needs to be done here. We were elected to come here to represent the people of Canada. We are not here to take what the House wants back to them. That has been the problem with governments since time began.
We want to review the legislation. As representatives of the people of Canada we want to have a look at it. That is what this opportunity is for.
We support the Bloc amendment for its openness and transparency. That is what we need more of in the country and the amendment will start the process of going down that road.
The DNA act, Bill C-3, is very important to the people of Canada, the population in general. We are here to represent those people. We should be the ones who review the legislation, not a governor in council order.
I wonder why we have to stand to debate this type of legislation. Why is it that members elected by the people of Canada to represent them do not get a chance to look at it and that it comes through the governor in council?
When the DNA bill is in place it will be a tool that will change the way crime fighting is done in the country. It will help to put some sense back into our system. It will not allow criminals to hide behind any legality. Once the profile is in place it can be used whenever a crime is committed.
Allowing us to debate the bill in the House and in committee and to bring it to our constituents to get their feelings on it is the only way we should proceed.
I congratulate the Bloc for bringing the amendment forward. It is a strange day when all opposition parties support the same amendment, but this is one of those days.
The importance of public scrutiny or scrutiny by the House cannot be overemphasized. We cannot have bills or rules coming forth to govern bills that have not had the blessing of the people of Canada. That is what we are here to do and that is why we are supporting the motion.
It is not precedent setting. It has already been done with Bill C-68, which helps to move us along that way. I wanted to add my voice to the support of Group No. 4. Hopefully members opposite can find it in their hearts to do so as well.