Mr. Speaker, I was interested in that the member was promoting the attractiveness of Toronto as being a centre of diamond processing. I suspect that maybe Yukon may have something to say about that, as well.
I wanted to follow up on a point that I discussed with the member earlier. This bill is an amendment to an act, so without the full act, it is a little difficult to understand. There are some subtleties which would tend to indicate how very careful one has to be in legislation to deal with the import and export of products, particularly in this case of rough diamonds or blood diamonds.
In section 15.(1), it prescribes that:
If imported rough diamonds arrive in Canada accompanied by a Kimberley Process Certificate that meets the requirements of section 14--
That is, the definition that they do constitute rough diamonds. It goes on to state:
--but are in a container that has been opened, the Minister may order the person who imported the rough diamonds to return them to the participant who issued the certificate.
I have not seen the regulations to this. One of the members from the NDP raised some very important points about the committee work. This is why I raise these questions. We may not have the answer, but the committee should be sure to get the answer. It has to do with a number of aspects.
First, this is permissive. It says the minister “may”. I am not sure why, but I always get nervous when I see the minister may do something. The minister either does it or does not it, and it is for a very considered reason.
The second aspect has to do with an open container. I do not know exactly how the controls are set up in the transport chain and whether they follow through to the acceptance of a package with a certificate. Clearly, if there is an open container, there may be a problem in the transportation and importation process which would require investigation. That has not been prescribed either.
My final point has to do with the rights of rescission or withdrawal of the importer of the rough diamonds to the extent that it is very likely arrangements have been made to fully pay for the shipment of the rough diamonds. The minister may have the authority to order the shipment to be returned. Now we have a case where someone who has in good faith imported rough diamonds for processing is losing. Where are the rights of the purchaser and how do we ensure that we do not have unintended consequences?
It is a range of questions. In a very modest bill such as this one, where it is an amendment to an existing act, one clause can have some elements that raise a lot of questions. I hope the committee will deal with these questions. That is why I bring them up now at second reading debate.