Thank you, Mr. Chair.
My question is for Ms. Morency.
In Mr. Comartin's amendment, we read “the date on which the alleged offence took place”, but in the bill before us. we read “the day on which this subsection comes into force”. That's the difference.
A lawyer reading that document knows that the effective date is the date on which it receives royal assent, and that everything in the section can be used as a defence once it is in effect.
But since you draft legislation for the federal government, I would like you to explain to me the difference between “the date on which the alleged offence took place”, and “the date on which this subsection comes into force”.
When I read the text carefully, I get the impression that it can apply retroactively. The day on which it comes into force is fixed, a lawyer knows that a certain date represents a certain thing. But with the words “the alleged offence”, a complainant could bring a complaint in 20 years saying that something happened at a particular time, and the defendant could be found guilty because of the words “date of the alleged offence”.
Ms. Morency, I would like to know your opinion on the two texts, both of which have merits. I am not clear on the force of the amendment.