—a new authority to prevent someone from being thrown out of the country.
I appreciate your bringing it up. It's where I was leading with my next question. I continue to not understand why folks—and maybe, Mr. Rico-Martinez, you can enlighten me on this—do not mention proposed section 42.1 in terms of saying that it does augment and give a threshold for the Minister of Public Safety to prevent someone from being thrown out of the country if, in fact, they've done something of a minor offence that has been interpreted as a serious one.
There is another point on this. How do we pass legislation that says a youth should be given a second chance? I don't know how you define that in legislation. If someone commits a crime and they're convicted of that crime, regardless of their age, I know you're talking about the whole issue of mental health and how they're doing psychologically. Those are issues faced by the courts every day.
Mr. Shore was involved in a case that took years to determine. I know for a fact that the issue of mental health and the capacity from a psychological perspective to stand trial is one of the issues that is faced on a daily basis in the court of law. If it is an individual regardless of age, why then shouldn't a senior citizen, someone who is 83, who commits a crime, not be waived in the legislation? We have to define within the legislation how we're going to and not going to treat people in the court of law.
If you're going to say we have to help youth—and I agree with all of those things—but you're going to define it in legislation, explain to me how.