Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have been aware of this private Member's bill and have not had the opportunity, like some Members, to hear some of the public input on it. It has not been something that has been brought to my attention by constituents. However, just listening to the debate here in the House tonight on it, some of the arguments that have been made on both sides are not entirely rational to my way of thinking. I hear that perhaps extending the residency requirement from six months to 12 months is somehow going to affect the applicant's knowledge and respect for the land, and somehow affect the kind of respect that they would show when they are out there hunting. That to me is just not a rational kind of argument.

On the other hand, I hear the concern of some of the aboriginal presenters to the committee, thinking that even two years is not long enough for somebody to be here to gain access to this kind of a privilege. On the other hand of that, there are ways and means of managing the inventory of the herds and the numbers so that we are not into a situation where we are depleting the herds or animals inventory. It seems like that is not really an issue or a problem either. I do not know. Some of the arguments that I hear being brought forward here tonight are a little bit shaky.

I think that although sports hunting is not something that is very dear to my heart, I can understand why some people coming here would think that this would be a great opportunity for them. I know of young people who have come here, even to teach school, that have come from other provinces and probably could make this their home, that could be a drawing card for them if they had access to hunting rights.

This is a tough one because of the process that is already underway as well. I am not overly optimistic that this is something that is going to happen, this revision to the legislation in a timely fashion, so I guess I am going o go with the compromise here tonight and go with the suggestion that Mr. Roland has made that perhaps going from two years to six months is too much of a leap. If it is any consolation to the people who are concerned about the residency to go to a one-year requirement, I could see that being a compromise and serving the interests of those who would like a shorter waiting period and hopefully also respecting the interests of those who feel six months is too short.

I will support the bill with the amendments that have been put forward by Mr. Roland. Thank you.