I disagree. Clause 531 would seem to me to imply that from now on an accused will have to go to a territorial division other than his own for a hearing. That's what it means.
Do you recall the letter dated April 2, 2007 sent to you by Ms. Louise Aucoin from the Fédération des associations de juristes d’expression française de common law? New Brunswick, for instance, is a province which is officially bilingual. Trials take place in the region of the accused. Under this bill, the Court could tell an accused to go to Fredericton for a hearing. There is nothing to prevent that. Why would francophones from Manitoba be forced to go to Winnipeg to have their cases tried? Why wouldn't the courts go into the regions, as should normally be the case?
I am not saying that you are not telling the truth, but I do not know if your interpretation of this provision is right. If I am not mistaken, the purpose was to change the legislation to make it more flexible and perhaps increase the number of courts where people could have their trials held. However, if that were the case, a francophone individual from Manitoba would have to pay out-of-pocket to go to court, when courts should be going into the regions.