Mr. Speaker, I have heard a number of NDP MPs articulate why they oppose this legislation. I want to bring up Bill C-55, and members will see the relevance to my question.
During my comments on Bill C-55, I stated that:
Section 184.4 contains a number of legislative conditions. Properly construed, these conditions are designed to ensure that the power to intercept private communications without judicial authorization is available only in exigent circumstances to prevent serious harm. To that extent, the section strikes an appropriate balance between an individual’s s. 8 charter rights and society’s interests in preventing serious harm.
On that particular second reading debate, when we were talking about individual rights, it was interesting that on March 20, 294 members of Parliament voted in favour of it.
Does the member see some relevance in terms of individual rights and how the Supreme Court back then made the suggestion about the wiretapping, and equally, in 2004, the Supreme Court made reference to the investigative hearings as being within the Constitution? In fact, we now have the same type of law enforcement officers and experts saying that as in the other situation, it is a tool for investigations. This is another tool to assist in combatting terrorism.
Why would the NDP would vote one way—