I respectfully thank the member opposite for his contribution. I found it very entertaining, and I enjoyed it.

I was going to ask a question that relates to the Hague Convention. In my past life, I would commonly deal with family law files—and for reference, the ratification of the Hague Convention would be an important step forward for the Family Responsibility Office. The Hague Convention would enforce orders. It would allow people to transcend Ontario or Canada to meet those orders. We expect everybody to meet their court obligations for child and spousal support, but we’re focusing on making things easier for families because they can make ends meet. Empowering the province to implement the 2007 Hague Convention in Ontario would give the province reciprocity to collect support payments with 34 more jurisdictions.

So my question to the member opposite—because I think this is a learning experience for some. It would also reduce the pressure on Ontario courts, saving a lot of people time and money, and reduce stress, which is such an important issue when you’re dealing with family law. It would help those relying upon support, most importantly. Will the member help our government ensure that families get the spousal and child support they need by supporting this?

To my friend from Waterloo: I’m always amazed to hear the government talk about cutting red tape when we see—I don’t think there’s any government in the history of Ontario that spent as much money fighting in the courts to justify their own bad legislation. I’m wondering if the member can tell me: Isn’t that a form of red tape? If you look at Bill 124, creating artificial legislation to suppress workers’ wages, and then when you’re told that it’s not legal, to go to court and fight that, isn’t that a form of red tape in itself?