It's a good point. Mr. Ménard said that the two things were different.
I have to say, Mr. Petit, I had not thought of that scenario of the young person coming back 10 to 15 years later and saying that back then, this was a crime. I do know that this would protect. My amendment would raise a defence of saying no, if you were married or living in that common-law relationship as defined by the code, that conduct was not an offence.
So there's no question in my mind that would provide a defence for the senior person in the relationship, but I had not addressed my mind specifically to that. I'm more concerned about the current situation, not one in the future. But in fact it would have that effect, acting as a defence for those future accusations.