All right.
We're obviously given all kinds of examples of the ability to make decisions. We're told about the laws of Utah and Texas, a state that incidentally has abolished abortion, thus denying women's rights. People cite legislation on the age of consent in certain American states where young people can go and get shot at in Afghanistan at the age of 18 but can't buy a beer when they go home.
In many respects, this is a value judgment issue. I'm not saying that as a joke. We're trying to determine who should be considered a minor in the context of the disclosure of personal information. Incidentally, for your information, I would remind the NDP and my friend Mr. Masse that they've introduced a bill in the House that would allow people to vote starting at the age of 16.
Here's the question we need to ask ourselves: Until what age should parents have full authority regarding the disclosure of personal information on the Internet, social media and elsewhere?
We also have to take into account the fact that there are clauses further on in the bill providing that the minimum age may be redefined, and I know you want to propose amendments regarding that. I know you discussed the age of majority that should be set in the bill, which you think should be 18, and that this will be reflected in subsequent amendments.
The compromise made in Quebec was to set the minimum age at 14. That's obviously under the Quebec law, and, as you know, we support the National Assembly's consensus. However, we nevertheless believe that was reasonable because we're not talking here about buying alcohol and driving a motor vehicle. We're talking about disclosing information on social media and the use of commercial products. Both present a risk, but they're virtually essential to socialization today.
Without wanting to criticize what's being presented here, I think it's entirely reasonable to set the age at 14. I'm more convinced that 18 is too high. That's where I stand so far.