Madam Speaker, I cannot seriously believe that, in light of the Gomery commission, these are your fears about what will happen in connection with the search for the answers everyone has been waiting for, including the Liberals, when they were in opposition. It is not an issue all that different from what has been going on currently in the House.
I am, however, absolutely certain that times are changing. Canada's level of education has risen considerably. It will be possible to find juries, well instructed by judges, capable of making decisions.
In any case, we are perhaps at the start of an appeal process. It could well be a long one, so that, if another trial is ordered, it will probably be held long after the findings of the commission of inquiry. This would not be the first time, either, that a person was put on trial following a commission of inquiry.
I myself think today, as most of the jurisprudence demonstrates, that the best jury is not the least informed. The best jury is an informed one, which gets tonnes of information in the press it has not got the time to verify and, while it sits in court and hears testimony, it is in the best position to decide on the evidence. It is perfectly capable of differentiating between prejudices it might have acquired from scanning the papers and evidence to which it gives careful attention during the trial. Generally speaking as well, it follows the judge's instructions carefully and honours its promise to judge only on the evidence.
The idea that legal proceedings are currently holding up a commission of inquiry—one which you appear to consider useful—strikes me as totally illusory. That is why I do not understand your resistance today.
We, and Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Canada especially, have everything to gain by bringing the rivalry between CSIS and the RCMP to light and finding out who is involved in infiltration and a lot of other things.