I understand that there was a point raised by Mr. Pallister on the intention and necessity of this motion, but now that we are dealing with this motion and the intention seems to be well intended, I think it's very important that we have the continuation of the motion in its entirety, specifically talking about manufacturing and Canadian job losses, in the way it's worded.
Je sais que M. Pallister a parlé du but et de la nécessité de cette motion, mais comme l'intention visée semble très claire, j'estime très important que nous conservions la motion dans sa version intégrale, en mentionnant tout particulièrement le secteur manufacturier et la perte d'emplois au Canada, selon le libellé actuel.