Madam Speaker, I just cannot resist the observation that it really does not further the tone of this debate to have the member opposite preach to the converted, the member who questioned him, and repeat all these things about the unfortunate remarks that were attributed to the minister of immigration. We should leave that behind. Whoever brings it up, we should leave it behind.
I would like to take the debate on to a point for the member that perhaps puts us back on track.
Does the member see any merit in perhaps revisiting some of the charter decisions that had such a profound effect on Canadian immigration policy? I am thinking specifically of the Singh decision of 1984 which, as members may not be aware, was a split decision. Only three justices ruled that a person who lands in this country should be entitled to all due process, ruled in terms of the charter, and the other three justices ruled in terms of the Human Rights Act.
So in fact there was no majority under any single legislation, much less the charter, that supported the supreme court's decision that was later interpreted as a fundamental charter decision.
I wonder what the member's thoughts are on that. Is this something that perhaps we should encourage the government to revisit and to test before the supreme court once again?