I thought maybe none of the Liberals understood the word flaccid and that is why I used limp this time, so I could catch more of them in understanding what I am saying.
It is incredible that the hon. member, whom I respect, falls into line to defend what is an inadequacy in the legislation. I would be much more pleased if the member said what the members in opposition, not only the Reform members but also members from the other parties, are saying about the legislation is important. We had better listen to it. Perhaps we ought to pass the amendment to hold the process for another six months so that we can have another look at it.
Instead we have an instant and automatic defence mode. Let us defend what we are doing because it cannot possibly be wrong in even the smallest regard so we will just keep on defending it. As long as that attitude persists we are not going to have proper adjustments and amendments to the bills so that the laws which result from them are truly effective. That is what we are seeking in the DNA act legislation. We want this to fly but we want it to be an effective system.
I also would like to say something regarding the concerns with respect to the invasion of the privacy of the criminal. Maybe we should start abridging their rights. Certainly an accused person has a right to a fair and speedy trial. A person charged has that right. We should as a society not feel hesitant at all to require a person so charged to co-operate fully with the judicial process by providing a DNA sample for not only the case that is the result of the charge but in order to link that individual with other possible crimes both past and future. It would be a valid part of reducing crime. I cannot understand why the government would be opposed to it, especially a government which has absolutely no qualms about trampling on human rights when it comes to confiscating property without compensation. It has no qualms at all marching into every household in the country to confiscate by the coercion of taxation half of their earnings every year. That is major intrusion. No qualms about that.
I beg the government to be a little more consistent in how vigorously it claims to be defending rights of citizens and freedoms of individuals in the country.