Mr. Speaker, in the first place, even if I indicated earlier, when I rose on a point of order, that 1 thought it was most unfortunate to have a situation where we are forced to debate the matter at this time, I am prepared to set aside those grievances for the time being and to address the substance of the question and at the same time take advantage of this opportunity to try and be as objective and fair as possible, and-without further reference to the attitude of the Hon. Member who just spoke-draw the attention of the House in all sincerity to the extraordinary work that has been accomplished by all members of the Special Committee on Parliamentary Reform during the last 18 months. I wish to stress the impartiality and good judgment of and the excellent work done by, the Chairman, the Member for Pontiac-Gatineau-Labelle (Mr. Lefebvre) who managed to make the members of his Committee work on a sustained and regular basis, while at the same time being flexible enough to set aside differences of opinion in order to reach a consensus on matters that were often delicate and always very important. I think he has shown extraordinary ability and that his work is fully deserving of praise at this time.
I also want to congratulate in general the Members on both sides of the House who gave the Committee the benefit of their experience and expertise and who via common effort attempted to find the necessary means by which Parliament could be more progressive, could improve itself and reform its procedure.
Having said this, I would like to understand why, under the leadership of the Hon. Member for Yukon (Mr. Nielsen), certain Members of the Committee believe that now is the appropriate time for the immediate concurrence of the seven reports of the Committee although they have not yet been considered by the House of Commons. I am honestly trying to understand what rationale or explanation would justify-
Subtopic: STANDING ORDERS AND PROCEDURE
Sub-subtopic: CONCURRENCE IN FIFTH REPORT OF SPECIAL COMMITTEE