Mr. Speaker, contrary to the previous questioner, I do not think anything in the report suggests that we have taken leave of our senses.
I do not know what the hon. member has against “Canada's water resources must be protected”. It seems like a self-evident statement. And “NAFTA covers all goods, except those that are expressly excluded” and water is not excluded. That seems like an interesting point. “Whereas this situation puts the provincial and federal laws concerning the protection of water including the prohibition of bulk water exports at risk” seems a reasonable conclusion from the previous statement. “Whereas a simple agreement by exchange of letters” may not cover the entire situation, “the standing committee recommend that the government quickly begin talks with its American and Mexican counterparts to exclude water from the scope of NAFTA”.
I cannot quite fathom why the committee of all three opposition parties has therefore taken leave of its senses to propose what appears to be a straightforward and clarifying recommendation. Would the hon. member comment on that?