Thank you for mentioning you met with the youth group. We are immensely proud of them, and a lot of people on the committee are moving up in the teamster ranks. I'm sure in a few years they will be serving our teamster members well: they're great leaders. Thank you for taking the time and meeting them.
When you draft legislation, people talk about their intention to fix it in regulation. If it is not within the four corners of the act it doesn't exist, and the regulatory process itself is influenced by all sorts of stuff, as I talked about earlier. The reason you need definitions is anything you want to deal with you have to not leave it to that catch-all clause that says the minister can do whatever he or she wishes. It doesn't catch it because if it's not in the act the minister can't do it.
From my experience with other bills, transport and all sorts of them where clearly the intention of Parliament was X, Y, and Z, I thought that's what the legislation said, but it's proven wrong in the regulatory world. Clearly that's not what the regulators thought. It certainly wasn't why some of the people came to the table. It is critical if you intend to do something that you have it in the law. Do not say it will be fixed in regulations, and do not say it will be dealt with in regulations. For example, one of the amendments we're talking about on suggestions in regulations is to just add three words “and mental health” to the occupational, health, and safety of the workplace committee's work. You can't add it if it's not in the act.
This is the last chance we're going to have to do this because opening up an act like part II of the code doesn't happen every day. Other than in the private member's bill, which will probably never see the light of day, this is the last chance you have to fix it, not just the mental health issue, but all issues.
As to the question about whether or not you should not agree with the bill, I think that's a choice you have to make as an individual. I agree with other people that there's a lot of really good stuff in the bill. In general, we support the principle. We'd rather see you make it better. I would urge you to bring amendments to the bill, my friends on any side. If you intend to do it, make sure the bill says it specifically. I urge that, and I haven't done it for so long on the other side. You'll be very surprised that what you thought you put on a piece of paper because you intended to, doesn't end up in regulation.