Mr. Chairman, I think that Ms. Jennings and Mr. Comartin were well-advised in introducing this amendment. I'm going to give you an example that you will surely like, as a former police officer. This is a little like the legal plain view tenet. We are legislators and it is incumbent upon us to correct injustice that is drawn to our attention, insofar as we respect the purpose of the bill.
It is as though we obtained a detailed search warrant from the court and saw certain objects that had been illegally acquired in a room and did not seize them in our search.
The plain view concept exists both in common law and civil law. You have surely resorted to it when you were a police officer. This is a little like legislative plain view. A provision of the law which is archaic and discriminatory has been brought to our attention. I think you have to assess the admissibility of this motion in a liberal manner. I am using the word “liberal” in the 19th century philosophical sense, let me make that clear. We have to have a generous vision of that which is admissible.
If this amendment could survive until the bill reaches the reading stage in the House of Commons, I am sure that we could respectfully convince our leaders and the Speaker of the House that it is in keeping with the objective of the bill.
I thus invite you to consider it with generosity. I'm convinced, Mr. Chairman, that we are going to correct a discriminatory situation that has no real justification.