Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I certainly respect my colleague’s view of this. I also respect the fact that the committee’s wish was to get rid of the traditional and locally accepted practices, clauses that were in the original amendments, ones that the committee had actually asked for and the department brought forward amendments that contain that wording, local and traditionally accepted practices. The committee asked for that and we got it in spades.

When we went out to public hearings, we heard, again, overwhelmingly that we shouldn’t be allowing for any exceptions to the abuse, neglect or cruelty to dogs. If folks are in accordance with the legislation, they have nothing to fear. There should be no exceptions. We heard this from not only from Aboriginal people; we heard it from non-Aboriginal people and Aboriginal people at public hearings across the Northwest Territories. I found myself in a very difficult position being the chair of the committee and having a committee that... Again, I respect the process.

The motion here to amend the Dog Act by taking out these clauses that reference acceptable practices which give people an exception, in my mind, another loophole, it just isn’t on with the public that I heard. That is the way I see things. We want to put forward the best piece of legislation we can. In fact, wording to this effect is contained in the Manitoba Animal Protection Act. There have been protests on the steps of the Manitoba Legislature asking for the resignation of the Agriculture Minister in Manitoba based on the fact that convictions are hard to come by. People are not being convicted under that legislation.

Mr. Chairman, that is the problem that we have. That is why we went to the amendments for our Dog Act so that when people are neglecting, abusing or mistreating dogs, they are going to be charged and convictions will happen. That just wasn’t the case under the old Dog Act. I thank the Member for Frame Lake for bringing forward the motion. I will be supporting the motion. Thank you.