Mr. Speaker, the more I listen to the member the more confused I get regarding his position. Clearly, he does not, in his own mind, in an intellectual way support the legislation.
What kind of intellectual aerobatics is the member performing? If he does not believe in it, which he obviously does not, how can he come into the House and support it? It makes absolutely no sense on an intellectual basis.
I know he is entitled to his point of view and he has articulated that point of view, but what kind of aerobatics, what kind of trickery is he practising here? He says one thing and will vote in another fashion when Bill S-17 comes before the House for its final vote. How can he do it?