Mr. Speaker, I am impressed at the thoughtful intervention of my colleague.
It has always been the Canadian character to strive for peace through diplomacy, then through peacekeeping if it has to. However, in the long run, if we have to have peace through force, we have illustrated ourselves to be quite capable in joining with our allies to protect our citizens and create a world where citizens in countries that are not protected by their own can also be protected.
Therefore, in this particular case, once again, we have a potential threat and we have a method of defence where we could go and join our allies.
However, is this the biggest threat to Canada and is it the wisest use of our money? We have very limited moneys for defence, having a very small population. There are a lot of demands on that money.
Is there enough threat of a missile that this is the best use of our defence money, because there are other threats from terrorism and from international crime? Maybe there are investments that would be more likely to protect Canadians.
That is one of the reasons why this is such an intense debate. There is no one in the House who does not want to protect Canadians, but the question is, what is the best technological method of doing that?