Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I believe that I have shown in the past to take very seriously any points of privilege that are raised. I do believe that they are very important and it is one of the privileges of being here, to raise those points, and I respect that very much.
I do want to respond for the sake of the debate here, just to respond to the point being raised. Mr. Speaker, I think it is very serious when anyone raises questions about whether we are giving the public the proper input into our legislative process, and those should be raised whenever there are questions asked and they should be properly answered to. I just want to say that in this case I don't think that it's true that the public have not had a chance to look at this bill or the intent of this bill, Mr. Speaker.
This bill was introduced in the House last October. The public hearing process of this was advertised in mass media throughout November. I know that the Social Programs committee held at least three public hearings on it, and the amendments, I know are troublesome for some and I appreciate that there are some points that are changing the nature and the substantive scope of the bill but, in my view, I believe those changes that were made are very much in line with the preamble of the bill which was introduced and read and accepted by the House, and I don't believe those amendments made in Committee of the Whole yesterday changes that.
So I do respect the right of Members to raise a point of privilege. I do want to add my point to this debate, and that is that I don't believe in this case that the assertions being made are true. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I await your decision.