Mr. Speaker, when issues of this nature come before us, we are asked to, as my colleagues have already stated very well, look not only at the particulars of it but the underlying or overriding message that a given issue or proposal might send. Then we take our stand and we live or die on the consequences.

I try to pick my hills, Mr. Speaker. Which are the ones worth battling for and which may be putting one's political arm at risk? My colleagues have already gone over a number of areas here. I guess on the specific issue here, I tried to see where it is that the overall project is being threatened or dramatically altered up to its completion. I do not see anything here that says that something has been eliminated or changed that dramatically. It seems that essentially this is, because of the way tenders and contracts and things have come about, it seems more expedient for the department to have managed them in a certain way, that meant moving the resources at this time for part of the project somewhere else.

It would seem, and it is even indicated in the motion, that it is a matter of one year on a specific project. It is not as if something is going to be left idling year after year. I do not see where mortal harm has been done to the completion of a major transportation initiative in that region.

Like my colleagues, I do see the signal that underlies this, that Ministers and the Executive need to be ever mindful of the fact that the authority that they carry today was given to them by all of us when we first met at the start of our business early in the year 2000. That authority was not given lightly. It was given with a degree of trust that they would honour the mandate of communicating, consulting and moving forward with us on what would seem to be relatively routine matters.

In some areas, we have been disappointed. There has been some discussion, Mr. Speaker, about that whole realm of consensus government and the style with which we treat it, and with which a number of other Canadians look at us with some envy at the freedoms we have. Along with that freedom comes responsibility to acknowledge the relationship that we must care for, nurture and protect.

I see in this motion an underlying message that the more effort the Executive puts into nurturing and strengthening this relationship, the less we will be inclined or required to do this kind of thing, and the more defence our system will build against such things as party politics, which some people see as an alternative. I do not. I would rather see us protect the system of government that we have now. This is one way we can do it.

As I said when I started out, Mr. Speaker, I pick my hills. This is not one I wish to advance on, and I will not be supporting it. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.