Thank you for your question. As a matter of principle, this government supports the timely study and the consideration of any legislation that comes before it, especially that which was passed by a majority of elected officials in the other place. I don’t think it’s open for debate — I should hope it’s not — that the Senate should prioritize private members’ bills duly voted on and passed by the House of Commons.

As you pointed out, this bill was adopted more than a year ago. It’s the government’s expectation that the committee seized with it will complete the study of this bill in a timely fashion. I certainly agree with what I think is implicit in your comment, namely, that it would be beneficial if this bill were returned to this chamber in a timely fashion for third-reading debate so that all senators can vote on it. Thank you.

Thank you. I was disappointed that the minister’s offer to appear was not accepted by the steering committee of the Foreign Affairs Committee. Indeed, allow me to suggest that I found it rather odd for the committee to have heard from bureaucrats and civil servants who are responsible for the implementation of government trade policy but not from the political policy-makers to whom they are accountable and to whom they report. Last time I checked, our elected leaders establish the trade policy direction of the country. Why shouldn’t we hear —