I appreciate that this bill came forward, in a similar format, back in 2018. However, parliamentarians have been elected since that point in time, such as me. While I have gone through and seen some of those concerns, we're not dealing with the same time frame or the same exact issues. I think it's incumbent upon us to make sure we're always looking at these bills and treating them in that new light.
Had there been a brief prepared for this committee with all of that previous information and every single witness, etc.... Had that been the answer, rather than having witnesses and conversations while we were in a meeting, perhaps I could have accepted that as an answer. However, to say, “Oh, because we studied this before, we're going to choose not to study it this time; just trust us”....
I don't think that's the best practice for any Parliament, quite frankly. That's not how we treat government bills, and I don't think that's how we should be treating private member's bills. I think it's incumbent upon us, after hearing from a number of stakeholders in the last few weeks. They have some minor concerns. It's valuable to make sure we're hearing from stakeholders on the actual substance of this particular bill, not applying the same arguments made to previous bills because it's easier and quicker to do.