Mr. Speaker, I have listened with great intent to my colleague and I thank him for his speech.
The point I made earlier was that the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration is appealing a particular case. The reason I would suggest she is doing that is because it would set a legal precedent. That decision will set a legal precedent which then again could affect other rulings in that particular area.
Here we have another example of this particular case affecting legislation in the definition of spouse and perhaps the redefinition of marriage.
I am wondering if my colleague could comment on the fact that the Liberal government says one thing in one area, it takes a specific action in appealing a particular case that will affect law in one area, yet it does absolutely nothing. It seems as though it does not even want this issue to be brought to the forefront, underpinning the fact that judges are reading in a new meaning to this particular law.
Could the hon. member comment on this contradiction, this lack of action in one instance when there is action in the other instance? How does he think the government might be able to explain this contradiction?