Hon. Donna Dasko: Would Senator Patterson take another question? Thank you, senator.

I want to approach this question similarly to Senator Dalphond but from a different angle. Although it’s desirable in your view to have these two initiatives go forward at the same time, from the enthusiasm we saw earlier here today for the earlier motion, it would seem likely that the first one could go forward while the second one might take a little more time.

Is that acceptable to you, even though you would prefer to see them both go together? Is it acceptable for you for the first one to go forward, and then perhaps Quebec, seeing the change in the other provinces, might in fact be more enthusiastic about taking this on if the change occurs in other parts of the country? Given that the current practice is so elitist, it seems to be very unacceptable to many of us. Thank you.

Senator Patterson: Thank you for that. You know, I think you make a very good point. If the reform is approved by both houses for every province and territory except Quebec, it will place an interesting challenge to the Government of Quebec and the people of Quebec to follow suit.

I have heard Senator Dupuis’ suggestion — which I would like to explore further — that the federal government’s position is to wait for a province to initiate such a change. I am not familiar with that position. She may be referring to what happened with the Saskatchewan matter that we are considering. I would take that into account in deciding how to proceed.

Let us have the bill studied in committee and the motion considered here. I am sure I will have further opportunity to discuss the strategy as we go forward. Thank you.

(On motion of Senator Wells, debate adjourned.)