Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I want to thank all of you for joining us today. You are the second-last group of witnesses on Bill C-36. The Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights is clearly tasked with studying this bill. The committee's approach is often of a very legal nature, and that obviously may appear to be out of touch with your respective realities.
As a lawyer, I have represented shelters for abused women. I can tell you that the situation is not clear-cut, and the shelters don't always have an easy job to do. So we raise our hat high to all those who work in settings where women are exploited, abused and treated with a blatant lack of respect. Many of us work day and night to fight this scourge. We do have a legal job to do here, and so I will focus on that.
We understand the work you have to do. I am somewhat biased in favour of CALACS. I admire the work you do. I may be a bit more familiar with those organizations than other groups here today. I want to thank those groups again for sharing their experiences with us. I also want to thank people from outside Canada. I appreciate other countries' experience, as that can help broaden our horizons. However, our legislative framework may sometimes differ from that of another country. That is the legislative framework we have to work within.
The Outaouais CALACS sent me its brief, which is similar to what you said, Ms. Sarroino.
Can you tell us a bit more about the work you do on a daily basis to fight against sexual assaults? We can see that sexual abuse is often related to conjugal violence. You have unfortunately identified too many cases.
Can you give us an overview of the work you do in your community? Can you explain to us in more depth why section 213 is so harmful if we start from the premise that women are victims of prostitution? In my opinion, this provision is almost a dismissal of the bill. We cannot say one thing while doing the opposite.
Can you tell us more about the nature of the work your group does in various regions? Can you also tell us what the problem is with this bill?
Some people feel this a way to hide. I think section 213 is the source of the problem in this bill. The same goes for the $20 million. I would like to hear a bit more from you on this.