--the minister himself referred to other bills. The parliamentary secretary and another member of the Conservative Party referred specifically to Bill S-6 and continued many questions on it. Therefore, I think my points are not at all inappropriate. They're in direct relation to statements that the minister himself has made here.
Now, I have a question. It's about your response on Bill S-6 and the issue of, if I can use your exact words, the terror and horror that families of victims relive over and over again when convicted multiple murderers apply for the faint hope clause every two years, or every two years from the previous application and refusal.
Would you be able to provide this committee with a reason why your members would have voted against an amendment to Bill S-6 that would have required a mandatory notification to the relatives of victims when an offender did not apply for early parole under the faint hope clause and, under the new legislation, would not be eligible again for five years?
That notification would also give the family of those victims a notification that the offender did not apply under the deadline and that the next earliest opportunity would not be until x date five years hence, in order specifically to allow those relatives to live a certain amount of time without that stress, without that anxiety that you so well and accurately described.
