Madam Speaker, as to the hon. member's point, I am and will be speaking on the whole issue of co-operation. It is important to recognize what co-operation can do when there is a common cause and a common purpose. A space station can be developed in four or five different countries and be assembled in space after being transported up there. Co-operation is the key point.
It is no different for the people of this country. They need to know where we stand on issues that are important to them. They need to know that the parliamentary process will allow that adequate debate, will allow input from the opposition, will allow their opinions to be heard, not shut down.
What would happen if that happened in the space program or at the international space station? I would not want to go into space and put myself in that mechanical device. I would not know if I was going to live or die because there was no co-operation on the part of the engineers, the politicians and the medical teams involved.
I will flip back over to the Nisga'a agreement where it is very clear that co-operation is at the centre of the whole affair. At no time did we state that aboriginal people should not have self-government of some form. We are not denying self-government. Co-operation is the key: all levels of government working together, just like in the space station; and all levels of those planning divisions working together to accomplish one goal.
In the particular case of the Nisga'a agreement, we have a form of government that is apart from all other governments. Who is accountable to whom? What government is going to act independently? We are talking about co-operation in a space station. We are talking about co-operation by different levels of government. The Nisga'a government is one such level.
I cannot understand why the government is actually afraid to debate the Nisga'a agreement to its nth degree? It should be proud of being able to do that. I would suggest that is the democratic process. I do not know why the government is so nervous about discussing the particulars of the treaty?
What I find rather unsettling is this tendency to label its opponents, or those with an opposing point of view to this treaty, in the cowardly manner in which it does. It all showed up when closure was invoked, which, in my humble opinion, was undemocratic, cowardly and a desperate act to attempt to smother a good and sound free speech debate in the House.
When it comes to the government, its action is no different than the B.C. government that rammed through the Nisga'a treaty in the provincial legislature against huge opposition.