Mr. Speaker, I still did not hear a whole lot to do with the bill and so perhaps I can help the member out.
The bill before the House today that we are debating was actually to be tabled on the day of the attacks here in Ottawa on Parliament Hill and against our Canadian Armed Forces. It was not a knee-jerk reaction as some in the opposition have said. It was actually a bill that was to be tabled that day. It was in direct relation to recent court decisions that called into question the authority of our security agencies to actually be able to operate overseas, communicate with our allies, and have the ability to provide their informants with the same protection that law enforcement agencies have across this country. I thought I would add this as general information for the member, possibly for his answers.
However, I am not surprised that NDP members voted against this legislation. They voted against it in committee and will certainly vote against it again. They have not supported a single measure that we brought forward.
This is common sense. It was in the works prior to the attacks. The attack on Parliament on that day is a clear indication that this legislation is needed and why it is needed quickly.
The member's party was not able to support the Combating Terrorism Act. It certainly did not support revoking citizenship from those who commit acts of terrorism against our allies or here in Canada. NDP members are voting against this bill and voting against standing shoulder to shoulder with our allies in the global fight against terror.
My question is very general. Does the member even understand the severity of terrorism in this world, the direct threat that groups like ISIL and those who have created a jihadist movement pose against our country, and what that means to Canada?