Mr. Speaker, two weeks ago the court martial case against Winnipeg Sergeant Mike Kipling was dismissed. The judge made this decision based on a finding of the fact that the particular batch of anthrax vaccine that Mike Kipling was ordered to take was unsafe and dangerous. The judge actually said that the government could never be justified to impose the inoculation of soldiers with unsafe and dangerous vaccines.
How could the government make the unbelievable decision to appeal this decision? Is that what the minister means by leaving no stone unturned?