MadamChair, what a coincidence, because I beseech my colleague opposite to debate it with us. That is what we are asking. Last week, the leader of the Bloc Qubcois asked the Liberal government to debate BillC-17 today. He did not get an answer. It does not seem to matter. Richard Wagner, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, who is hardly a dimwit or greenhorn, told us that the justice system needs to be modernized. As recently as this past Saturday in LaPresse, Justice Wagner said that it is essential that the Criminal Code be amended to address the backlog of court proceedings. When will the Liberal government opposite pull up its socks, do its job, govern the federation, sit down with the opposition and discuss the vital matters in BillC-17?
MadamChair, if I were my colleague, I would be a little embarrassed, because the bill was sent to the Bloc Qubcois several days in advance. They received a technical note several days in advance. We were all available to take questions. When we asked for the support of the Bloc Qubcois and the other parties to debate itwe were not even asking them to vote in favour of the billthey refused.
MadamChair, we never refused to debate it. Actually, we were the ones who asked to debate it. What exactly does debate it mean? We set some conditions. For example, we asked the Liberals to put the money back into the wage subsidy fund and to commit to dip into it no longer. Are we asking too much of our colleagues opposite?
Can my colleague explain to me what the emergency wage subsidy has to do with a bill about justice? This is an absolutely fundamental piece of legislation. We wanted to debate it, but they refused to do so.