Briefly on the subamendment, there seems to be a lack of legal underpinning to the whole situation in that the age of majority in each province is either 18 or 19. It's very different, and that's the age at which people are recognized in law. What I'm hearing from the subamendment and from the NDP is that young people who are not people in law, able to make their own decisions and choices, can make a decision up to a point. It seems to be quite inconsistent with what I've been hearing--supposedly as policy--from both parties, and I'm at a loss to understand what the legal underpinning might be, except, as they say, exigent circumstances make bad policy. I think we would be very much at odds with the law, given that in New Brunswick young Liberals can join for no fees whatsoever.
This probably needs more study--the subamendment, that is.
The consistent approach in Quebec, where the age of majority is 18, seems to be legal. It seems to be constant with good political principles, and if that's the spirit of this as well, I could certainly support the main amendment.
On the subamendment, it's hasty, it's rash, it's opportunistic, and it's wrong in law.