QUESTION PERIOD AT THE NEW BRUNSWICK LEGISLATURE!!! < Jeudi >

STE_0161
Originally uploaded by Oldmaison.

ORAL QUESTIONS 20 QUESTIONS ORALES
April 27, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 27 avril 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\26 2006-04-27 BL\26 2006-04-27 BL.wpd 1/10
011 13:45
Protection of Personal Information
Mr. Lamrock: Yesterday was another remarkable day in the Legislature. One year after the member
for Kennebecasis violated privacy law and wound up losing her job, once again, we see that this
government is incapable of following the laws that it wants the rest of New Brunswick to live by.
The Premier stood up, while under attack because of an ethics lawsuit against him, and he released
information about an innocent bystander, a private New Brunswick citizen who had asked his MLA
to write a letter. He then sent his political staff out to advise all the media and give them copies of
the letter, letting them know the individual’s personal information, both the conviction and the fact
that he had made an application for assistance.
Today, they tried to blame it on the Press Secretary who handed it out, but it was at the Premier’s
direction, and the letter emanated from the Department of Transportation. I want to read from the
Protection of Personal Information Act, which this government may want to get in a pocket copy
for future reference. It says:
Personal information shall not be used or disclosed for purposes other than those for which it was
collected . . . Personal information shall be retained only as long as necessary for the fulfilment of
those purposes.
My question to the Minister of Transportation is this: When you provided that letter to the Premier
for use in political debate as a smear file in the Legislature, what was the legitimate public purpose
under Principle 5 that you were following? What was the use that would have made that action
legal?
Hon. Mr. Lord: The member for Fredericton-Fort Nashwaak said things that are totally incorrect
in the preamble to his question. I want to set the record straight. First of all, he alleges that there is
an ethics lawsuit against me. That is untrue. All we have seen this week is the Liberals coming in
to insinuate things that are untrue. There is no ethics lawsuit against me or against the government.
The lawyers on the other side can raise their papers. It is not an ethics lawsuit.
Second, he says in his preamble that the Press Secretary was directed by myself and others to
distribute that letter yesterday. That is also untrue. The Press Secretary was responding to a request
by a reporter to get a copy of the letter. Unfortunately, the Press Secretary did not think twice and
gave a copy of the letter without blocking out the name of the individual. This is a serious situation,
one that we take very seriously. I had a conversation with my Press Secretary. He has tendered his
resignation because of this situation. I accept his resignation.
ORAL QUESTIONS 20 QUESTIONS ORALES
April 27, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 27 avril 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\26 2006-04-27 BL\26 2006-04-27 BL.wpd 2/10
012 13:50
Mr. Lamrock: The Premier’s conduct in this matter requires a mea culpa, not a “they-a culpa”. The
fact is, making his Press Secretary the fall guy is beneath that office. The Press Secretary had the
letter after the Premier had been waving it around in the Legislature. It was sitting there in his desk,
for use in a political debate. The Premier and I have gone through this once before, when he stood
here unable to quote from the Act or to justify it legally. He wound up spending $100 000 and
making the Minister of the Environment go through two months of hearings before finally having
to accept the inevitable. Now, because it is the Premier who is on the line, he is trying to pass it off
to other people.
The Premier had that letter in his desk. Indeed, he offered to table it in the House. He did not think
to black out that information, He was willing to throw that name out there. The Press Secretary was
acting on the Premier’s orders. The Premier had the letter at his desk, for use in political debate.
Principle 5 states that you should only use citizens’ information for legitimate purposes. What
legitimate purpose required the keeping of that citizen’s personal information at the Premier’s desk
in the Legislature?
Hon. Mr. Lord: The letter was at my desk, not so that I could use the information of the individual,
but so that I could use the content of the letter. Having the letter in my possession is not contrary to
the Act. If someone had filed a right-to-information request, the letter would have been submitted
with the name blocked out. What was incorrect was that it did not have the name blocked out. What
was really incorrect was the fact that a member of the Liberal caucus wrote to a minister and asked
that minister to intervene and to give a permit to someone who had been found guilty of drunk
driving. That was incorrect. If the Liberals want to talk about standards and ethics, they should start
setting some on their side.
Unfortunately for me, I am losing a very competent Press Secretary. He made a mistake, he has
owned up to his mistake, he understands that it was a mistake, he has apologized for the mistake,
and he regrets his mistake. I accept that.
Mr. Lamrock: My worry is not that the Press Secretary resigned; it is that people who will not
admit their mistakes and who do not understand privacy laws still have access to all our personal
information. Even worse, it is the head of this government.
Mr. Speaker: Order. Member for Fredericton-Fort Nashwaak, you will address your questions
through the Chair to the minister responsible. Members, please respect one another.
Mr. Lamrock: My concern is not that the Premier has had his Press Secretary quit. My problem is
that the Premier is still the head of this government, and he does not understand how to respect the
privacy of citizens. The fact of the matter is, the member for Miramichi-Bay du Vin asked whether
ORAL QUESTIONS 20 QUESTIONS ORALES
April 27, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 27 avril 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\26 2006-04-27 BL\26 2006-04-27 BL.wpd 3/10
there was any legal remedy for a constituent in a situation. The minister could have simply
responded: No, I cannot do that under the laws that are in place.
The fact is, the Act itself states that personal information shall only be retained for as long as is
necessary for the fulfillment of a legitimate public purpose. The Premier was holding onto this letter,
which was not even addressed to him, for over a year. He put it in a smear file, like Richard Nixon
with his old enemies list. The fact is, he knows better.
My question to the Premier is this: If he was so concerned about the ethics—if that was really the
legitimate public purpose—can he show us one place where he sent the letter to a legitimate
investigative authority? Did he send it to the Ombudsman? Did he send it to the Conflict of Interest
Commissioner? Did he forward it to the RCMP? Or did he only keep it for a smear file here in the
Legislature? If you only kept it for a smear file, Mr. Premier, how many other ministers have you
asked to forward you letters for use in legislative debate, in violation of the law?
Hon. Mr. Lord: The strategy that we see again from the member for Fredericton-Fort Nashwaak
is this: If you don’t have facts, create them. That is exactly what he is doing; he is creating facts.
When he wants to allege . . . We do respect the privacy of citizens. It is very important, and that is
why, yesterday, when this happened, the Press Secretary, on his own, went out and apologized. He
realized that he had made a mistake, and he tendered his resignation to me, and I accepted it. That
is a big consequence for something like this, but it is a serious matter.
We do not have any lessons to take from the members of the opposition on this. They come in every
day; they bring in allegations and innuendoes that are not founded in fact. One of theirs, yesterday,
threw in one of the worst accusations in this House—one accusation, I am sure, that they will not
repeat outside this House, because they know the consequences of saying it outside the House. They
know they are protected in this House; that is why they say things in this House that they do not
repeat outside the House.
013 13:55
The member from Neguac did not ask to know if there was a remedy. She suggested a specific
remedy—giving a day permit to someone who had been found guilty of drunk driving.
Mr. S. Graham: The issue of concern today is not the total incompetence of the Press Secretary
Chisholm Pothier. The issue of grave concern today is the responsibility and the credibility of this
government.
My question to the Premier is this: Why are you, and members of your Cabinet, keeping a file of
New Brunswickers’ personal information for your political use?
ORAL QUESTIONS 20 QUESTIONS ORALES
April 27, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 27 avril 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\26 2006-04-27 BL\26 2006-04-27 BL.wpd 4/10
Hon. Mr. Lord: I think what is really at stake is the credibility of the Leader of the Opposition and
his caucus. They come to this House every day to smear people and to raise accusations and
innuendos that are incorrect and incomplete, just for the single purpose of trying to force an election
and trying to grab power.
The fact is, the file was not kept on the individual. It is a letter that had been shown to me, coming
from the member of the opposition caucus. The minister responded to that letter, and sent a copy to
the Leader of the Opposition. My question to the Leader of the Opposition . . . I know he will tell
me that it is question period where he asks and I answer. Maybe he will want to answer this question
to the people of New Brunswick: What did he tell his member from Neguac who asked for a drunk
driver to get a special permit? Is that the policy of the Liberal Party of New Brunswick?
(Interjections).
Mr. Speaker: Order, please.
Mr. S. Graham: The issue is as simple as this: A letter was sent in January 2005, which is well over
a year ago. The minister responded to the letter. This Premier and this government sat on that letter,
and for well over a year, they kept information in this Legislature pertaining to a private citizen in
New Brunswick. That is the question that this Premier has not answered: Why does his government
have a smear file folder put together of letters pertaining to private information of citizens, which
it is using for its political gain?
Hon. Mr. Lord: The one person who comes to this House every day for the sole purpose of political
gain is the Leader of the Opposition. Since we have tabled an excellent budget for the people of New
Brunswick, they do not want to ask questions on education. They do not want to ask questions on
health care. They do not want to ask questions on how we are protecting the assets of seniors that
the opposition wanted to take away. Every day opposition members come in, they find an affidavit,
and they try to find something in that. They find another innuendo or another letter or something
else. They prop up an independent member of this House, who is really a member of their caucus,
to say things that they know he cannot say outside this House. That is the tactic and the approach
of the Leader of the Opposition. What we normally say in French is this:
C’est de la petite politique, c’est de la politicaillerie, et c’est ce à quoi on peut s’attendre du Parti
libéral. Il y a une question qui reste sans réponse : Est-ce la politique du Parti libéral d’encourager
ses parlementaires à obtenir des passe-droits pour des gens qui ont été reconnus coupables d’actes
criminels, dont l’ivresse au volant?
Mr. S. Graham: It is very clear today that the Premier is not accepting responsibility for this grave
mistake, this breach of privacy pertaining to citizens of New Brunswick who, in faith and in trust,
gave their information to government, not expecting it to be used for political gain.
ORAL QUESTIONS 20 QUESTIONS ORALES
April 27, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 27 avril 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\26 2006-04-27 BL\26 2006-04-27 BL.wpd 5/10
If the Premier cannot police his ministers, it is becoming very evident today that he cannot police
himself. The only individual with integrity and credibility in this Chamber is the individual who
broke the Act and stepped down from that post the day after he admitted he broke it.
My question to the Premier is this: Will he hold himself to the same ethical standards as the former
Minister of Family and Community Services did?
Hon. Mr. Lord: I know that the Leader of the Opposition comes here every day and hopes that an
election will be called that day. Every day that goes by, he is one day closer to being removed from
his job by his own party. He wants another kick at the can. There will be a chance to have an
election. I love elections. I love campaigning. I love proposing ideas and putting forward a platform
that we will build on and a platform that we will respect.
014 14:00
The simple fact of this case is that, unfortunately, the Press Secretary of the Premier’s Office gave
a letter at the request of a reporter, without blocking out the name of the individual. That was a
mistake, a mistake that has been acknowledged. He has acknowledged that mistake and offered his
resignation, and I have accepted that resignation. That is a serious step for the individual to take,
because this is a serious matter. We know that we must protect the private information of individuals
in this province, and we will continue to do that.
Mr. S. Graham: The Premier stands up and says he would love to have an election. It is too bad that
he would not love to protect the private information of New Brunswick citizens just as much. This
is not the first time that this government has released private information on New Brunswick
citizens. This is the third time. This is not an issue of the incompetence of the former Press Secretary
of the Office of the Premier. This is an issue of the integrity and credibility of this government.
My question for the Premier is this. If Chisholm Pothier made the decision to release the letter, who
gave him the letter?
Hon. Mr. Lord: I had the letter in this House yesterday. Yesterday, I stated clearly—and you can
review the Hansard, and if you want a copy of the letter, I can table the letter . . . Before tabling the
letter, we would take the appropriate steps to protect the information of the individual. The fact that
the letter was there is not an issue. The only issue is that the name of the individual was not blocked
out, as it should have been. I agree on that. However, there is nothing wrong with having the letter.
The real issue is that the Leader of the Opposition refuses to answer or to address whether it is the
policy of the Liberal Party. Can we expect that if there is a Shawn Graham government, the
members of his government will approach ministers to get free passes for people who are found
guilty of drunk driving or other criminal offenses?
ORAL QUESTIONS 20 QUESTIONS ORALES
April 27, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 27 avril 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\26 2006-04-27 BL\26 2006-04-27 BL.wpd 6/10
Mr. S. Graham: I am sure the Premier understands the Protection of Personal Information Act.
Schedule A clearly states that personal information shall not be used or disclosed for purposes other
than those for which it was collected. The question that the Premier just answered and admitted his
guilt on, the fact that this response was given over a year ago, in January 2005 . . . He has had it in
his possession for over a year for political gain. The time has come to put integrity and credibility
back into this government. That is why, today, we are going to send the statements of the Premier
and the release of the information to the Ombudsman. The Ombudsman will make a decision as to
whether, indeed, the Act has been violated. My question to the Premier is this: Are you prepared to
live by the verdict of the Ombudsman?
Hon. Mr. Lord: The Leader of the Opposition can do what he wants with my statements. The
statements that I make in this House are distributed and are available to anybody who wants them.
However, the fact that I had a letter that stated that one member of the opposition wanted to get a
free pass, a get-out-of-jail-free for one of her constituents who was found guilty of drunk driving . . .
That is what you can expect from a government led by Shawn Graham. The friends of that party will
get free passes. If you are found guilty of drunk driving, apply to the minister, and you will get a free
pass. You will get a temporary permit.
That reminds me of what took place in Shediac—Cap-Pelé when they went ahead and . . .
(Interjections.)
Mr. Speaker: I ask members once again: When I recognize the member who has the floor, he has
the floor. Please respect the member who has the floor.
Hon. Mr. Lord: What happened yesterday that was incorrect was that the letter was released
without the name of the individual blocked out. The Press Secretary who made that mistake realized
that he made a mistake. He apologized for it yesterday. We had a conversation about it yesterday.
We agreed to talk about it this morning. He offered his resignation, which I accepted. He made a
mistake. It is unfortunate. I am losing a very good Press Secretary who did very good work for the
government of New Brunswick. He made a mistake, he is paying the price, and he is assuming
responsibility.
015 14:05
Economic Development
Mr. Haché: A former senior civil servant, in an interview with the CBC on April 25, 2006, stated
that the Lord government is missing out on business opportunities. In fact, Mr. MacBride makes
direct references to Research in Motion and the loss of potential high-skilled jobs, high-paying
incomes, and economic spin-offs as failures of this current administration. New Brunswick cannot
allow multinational companies to invest in other provinces simply because the minister is either
ORAL QUESTIONS 20 QUESTIONS ORALES
April 27, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 27 avril 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\26 2006-04-27 BL\26 2006-04-27 BL.wpd 7/10
unaware of their potential or uninterested in actually being proactive and seeking these forms of
investments. My question for the Minister of Business New Brunswick is simple. Why is he
unwilling to take a serious role in economic development in the province and aggressively promote
new research and innovation?
Hon. Mr. MacDonald: I want to assure you that all members on this side of the House take the
economy and economic development in this province very, very seriously. Let the numbers speak
for themselves: 9 800 more jobs this year than last year. Thank you.
Mr. Haché: Mr. Speaker, I hope that you allow me the time that the minister did not use for me to
use for a question. That would be fine.
The Minister of Business New Brunswick seems to hide behind rhetoric—that is not the case, but
that is what is written here—to avoid our very clear and direct question. Mr. MacBride goes on to
state that he worked actively on economic development and business recruitment when Frank
McKenna was the Premier of New Brunswick. He goes on to describe the process with Frank
McKenna as proactive and passionate toward economic development and that it was the number one
priority. It is one thing to say that economic development is important for New Brunswick; it is
another to make it a reality. The loss of Research in Motion is just another example of Lord’s failure
to be proactive and passionate. Will the new Minister of Business New Brunswick commit to lead
on this file and to make this file passionate and proactive once again?
Hon. Mr. MacDonald: Thank you for that lengthy question. I presume that there was, of course,
a question in there. Last year, our exports in this province grew by 13%. That is $1.2 billion. That
is a greater increase than all other Atlantic Canadian provinces combined. If memory serves me
correctly, Frank McKenna was not the Premier last year.
Mr. Haché: Mr. MacBride continues to provide insight as to how this province can, once again, be
self-sufficient. First and foremost, he claims that the current focus of the Lord government must
shift. He claims that the leadership must come from the top and that it must take more serious
initiatives. The Lord government likes to use economic spin to avoid answering our serious
questions. Using the government’s own figures, the gap between New Brunswick and Canada with
regard to real personal income, real disposable income, and real labour income has widened since
2000. This means that New Brunswickers are making less money relative to Canada since the Lord
government took office. Is this progress? You can provide political spin to avoid reality, but
ultimately . . .
Mr. Speaker: State your question, please.
Mr. Haché: My question is this: Does the Minister of Business New Brunswick have a solution for
this? If not, will he step aside?
ORAL QUESTIONS 20 QUESTIONS ORALES
April 27, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 27 avril 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\26 2006-04-27 BL\26 2006-04-27 BL.wpd 8/10
Hon. Mr. MacDonald: I would like to take this opportunity to set the record straight. Our weekly
earnings are increasing. In fact, the Canadian average between 1998 and this year was an increase
of 2%, but we beat that here in New Brunswick. Ours increased by 2.6%.
016 14:10
Let the facts speak for themselves. There are 36 000 more people working in the province today than
was the case on June 7, 1999. That is not spin.
Mining
Mr. Kenny: My question is for the Minister of Post-Secondary Education and Training. It is a fact
that, because of an aging workforce and industry growth, the mining industry is facing a shortage
of up to 81 000 workers in the next decade. That is according to MITAC, the Mining Institute of
Training and Adjustment Council. New Brunswick will experience similar problems in the mining
industry. An extensive study called Prospecting the Future brought together experts in the human
resources sector who were specifically concerned about the mining sector’s limited ability to recruit
a sufficient number of new entrants to meet industry growth or, more importantly, to replace highly
skilled and experienced workers who are likely to retire within the next 10 years. Again, New
Brunswick is not an exception to these shortages.
My question to the minister is this: Has your department reviewed this very important study and
looked at the opportunity for a mining and training facility in Bathurst, as a Centre of Excellence,
to create jobs and to train New Brunswickers for this growing industry?
Hon. Mr. Carr: We are reviewing the report. I can tell you that our priorities for Bathurst are very
clear. We treat Bathurst as a high priority, which is how we treat all areas of New Brunswick. I was
pleased, just last week, that the Minister Responsible for the Regional Development Corporation
provided nearly $300 000 for innovation and research at the Bathurst community college. We are
going to be very clear in our work for all areas of New Brunswick. We will help all of the people
of New Brunswick have the best place to learn and an even better place to work, as we move our
province even further forward under the Premier’s Five in Five Initiative.
Mr. Kenny: Over six months ago, the former Minister of Training and Employment Development
was in Bathurst. I met with her specifically to raise this opportunity. New Brunswick could be well
positioned to create a mining training facility, to meet the demands of the mining industry, and to
keep New Brunswickers in the province, rather than shipping them out to be trained elsewhere. This
would create new jobs, and it would help our mining industry right here in the province. Has the
former minister briefed you, or has anyone in your department briefed you, on this opportunity?
After six months, what has been done to follow up on this?
ORAL QUESTIONS 20 QUESTIONS ORALES
April 27, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 27 avril 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\26 2006-04-27 BL\26 2006-04-27 BL.wpd 9/10
Hon. Mr. Carr: I can tell you very clearly that since I became minister, we have put a lot of focus
on community colleges and on postsecondary education. In fact, it is not only since I became
minister, but since we took office. We turned things around for postsecondary education, whereas
the previous government cut funding to universities, cut seats in community colleges, and reduced
our trades out of high school altogether. Our Premier and our government have reversed that. We
are focusing on our skills, and we are focusing on tradespeople like never before. We are making
New Brunswick the best place in Canada, and we are going to continue to do it.
Mr. Kenny: Everything you have said is fine and dandy, but we gave this report to you six months
ago, and time is ticking away in the mining industry. I met personally, on several occasions, with
the MITAC institute and its managers in Ottawa to discuss the report. I met with the community
colleges in Bathurst. I also met with the general manager of Enterprise Chaleur, and I met with
industry leaders, to discuss what is taking place in the mining industry and to discuss the
opportunities we have in Bathurst to establish a mining training centre. Has anyone from your
department or anyone from the community college in Bathurst discussed this important file with
your department? Can you give a commitment today to review this file in a timely manner and to
take some action?
Hon. Mr. Carr: I am a very fair individual. Quite frankly, the member opposite has been telling us
about a lot of meetings. I have not received a single request from this member opposite to meet. I
would certainly be more than happy to meet with the member for Bathurst to discuss this issue.
Quite clearly, our commitment to mining is clear. In fact, another $2.5 million was provided for
exploration. Our commitment to the people of New Brunswick is clear. Our commitment to
community colleges, to Bathurst, to universities, and to skills training in high school is very clear.
We are doing a lot. We have 36 000 more people working. In fact, we are going to do even more.
We are going to make New Brunswick the best province in Canada—the smart province, the
investment province, the wellness province, the clean province. Our Premier has a vision. We have
a plan. We are doing good things. We are going to do more.
Trucking Industry
Mr. Foran: My question is addressed to the Minister of Transportation. I stand here today in
defence of the small trucking industry, that is, the independent truckers in the province who are
running into some hardships.
017 14:15
I have had input from my own colleagues. I have even had input from one of the ministers from
northwest New Brunswick. We are all running into the same problem. Recently, the loss of the lift
axle on tandem trucks has had a devastating effect on the truckers involved. In the transporting of
forest products, when we look at the high cost of fuel and the reduction of the allowable weight that
ORAL QUESTIONS 20 QUESTIONS ORALES
April 27, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 27 avril 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\26 2006-04-27 BL\26 2006-04-27 BL.wpd 10/10
the truck can haul, this can certainly impact the profit margin for these truckers. Will the minister
consider reinstating the lift axle in order to allow them to continue to serve this industry?
L’hon. P. Robichaud : J’apprécie la question du député de Miramich-Centre. Vous savez, comme
ministre des Transports, bien souvent, nos décisions sont basées sur des études pancanadiennes en
ce qui a trait à la sécurité routière.
D’ailleurs, en 1997, une étude pancanadienne a dévoilé que certaines pièces d’équipement étaient
un peu dangereuses pour non seulement les gens qui les utilisaient mais pour le public en général
qui utilisait notre système routier. Suite aux recommandations de 1997, nous avons apporté certaines
modifications en ce qui a trait aux essieux qui sont admissibles sur les routes et également au niveau
du poids, parce que nous avons également la responsabilité de protéger l’investissement des
contribuables lorsque nous construisons des routes.
Toutefois, je suis prêt à étudier le point que le député de Miramichi-Centre vient d’apporter, mais
je dois l’assurer d’une chose : nos décisions sont basées sur des études relatives à la sécurité
routière.
Mr. Foran: We are all aware that we have to promote safety on our highways. However, no
information has been brought forward by the minister that supports the lift axles in question. Can
the minister provide the House with the necessary information that this configuration will endanger
other users of the highway?
L’hon. P. Robichaud : Comme j’ai répondu à la question précédente, je suis prêt à travailler et à
collaborer avec le député de Miramichi-Centre pour voir quelles sont ses propositions. Toutefois,
nous basons essentiellement nos décisions sur des études qui touchent la sécurité routière et les gens
qui utilisent notre système routier pour leur travail ou pour tout simplement se promener. Nous
avons aussi des politiques qui sont conformes aux autres provinces canadiennes. Ce que nous
voulons voir, c’est une harmonisation des politiques dans tout le Canada, afin que nos gens qui sont
dans l’industrie du camionnage puissent être sur un même pied d’égalité avec les autres provinces
canadiennes en ce qui a trait à la concurrence. Toutefois, je suis prêt à regarder à ce que le député
veut proposer.