Sir, I can give you innumerable examples where time has been taken and rightly taken. Why, the fundamental constitution of the country should be studied, should be considered, should be viewed from every angle before it is passed. And that will not be served, I repeat, Sir, by your hurrying through in this manner. If, therefore, it is open to me to move, I would certainly suggest that this matter be referred back to the Drafting Committee itself, or the Steering Committee of this House or whatever the appropriate body may be, to see to this matter. I am not against expediting, getting the constitution as rapidly passed as possible. I am against this being very hurriedly gone through; I am against its being gone through in a slip-shod manner, and that is why I suggest to you: Let us discover other ways like more time being devoted to it, and more space being devoted. Let us also remember that we are often reproached with getting our allowances, unearned. I, therefore, suggest, Sir, that the House will do well indeed, if instead of passing a motion like this today, which they can very well pass with a majority pledged to it, you will reconsider the matter, and bring it up again with such amendments in time and so on, if you find there is a desire for obstructiveness for its own sake. That would permit the fullest possible discussion, that would leave no room for anybody to feel that their expression was not fully placed before them and at the same time serve to make the Constitution full, complete and accurate, and much better than attempts like this would let it be. Thank you, Sir.
