I think I can add a couple of comments very briefly.
First, the government's position is that the bill is defensible under the charter. It's not that the charter does not apply. Of course, the bill may be subject to a charter challenge; that's the way our legal system works. At the end of the day, it will be for the court to determine whether the bill complies with the charter.
The position is that it's defensible under the charter, not that the charter does not apply. The charter applies to all bills and legislation of the federal government.
The second point I would make, and very briefly, is that as Department of Justice counsel I'm not here to debate the law with you. I'm here simply to explain the law and the government's position with respect to the law.
You probably are familiar with the Department of Justice Act and section 4.1, which requires the Minister of Justice to examine every government bill that's presented in the House to ensure it's consistent with the purposes and provisions of the charter. I can tell you that this bill wouldn't be before the committee today had the Minister of Justice determined, when he did that examination, that the bill was not consistent with the purposes and provisions of the charter.