Mr. Chairman. There is some reason to make suggestions that we are making some moral judgements, perhaps, whether explicitly or implicitly. We could have come forward with legislation that said we want to provide protection for spouses where they are of the same sex. However, I would suggest that it would receive almost no support in this Legislature for that. Unless you unanimously jump up and prove me wrong, I'd be prepared to go back and redraft but that's the indicators I've got so we didn't do it. These provisions, I felt, were required to address hundreds of cases where couples now living common-law have no protection. The Member's not listening so I don't know why I'm bothering to talk to him. He wants to make a speech and then whirl around at his desk and expound to other Members; there should be the same respect accorded to me because I'm proposing the legislation. There are good provisions in this legislation, I believe. I think there's good legislation here and it can provide some protection. It's limited, yes, because its specific amendments. There are other amendments, other proposals that are going to come forward in a larger package

as part of the family law reform but at this time this is what we are proposing and I suggest that we should go ahead with it.