Mr. Speaker, the case of Mr. Andrew Speaker, who has the serious communicable form of tuberculosis, raises an imperative about the legislation or need for it.
I know also that representatives of the Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, Health Canada as well as persons responsible for the security and prosperity partnership issue were at the committee meeting.
Because there was implicitly an exemption for buses, trucks, trains and cars in the original bill, it strikes me that it was possible there was a trade-off between the border considerations and the economic considerations of those priorities with the health of people.
Is the member aware or did she receive any indication from the witnesses at committee that the reason the exemptions were there in the first instance was in fact not inadvertent but deliberate, taking into account objectives other than health and safety?