Mr. Speaker, when the member was in government months ago he had the opportunity to make the decision but did not, and now he brings that forward to us.
Now he is telling us that not only should we ignore the courts, but we should ignore the French interpretation that came from the judgment. It came from a French statute. There is an English and a French statute and the court interpreted the French statute as being more specific and more narrow.
Is the hon. member suggesting that we ignore the French interpretation? I would suggest not.
The minister will do what is in the best interest of Canadians. We have a universal postal guarantee across this huge country. The decision will be made but all members can be assured that the decision made by the minister, by the government and by the Prime Minister will be in the best interest of Canadians long term.