On looking at the proposed amendment, we note that there is the section of the legislation as such and, as is often the case in the Criminal Code, some forms. The fact of the matter is that these forms are established to ensure uniformity across Canada. However, each form must also correspond to a provision in the code. Whether it relates to an appearance notice, a bail order or some other thing, each form must correspond to a provision in the legislation.
A form is a means of expression. It must not be equated with the substance. We have voted in favour of the substance and therefore, the form, the means of expression, the paper on which the substantive message is conveyed, must correspond. A form is therefore the vehicle for conveying the message, not the message itself.
Of course, you can say that we did not show it to you. If you come before a judge, I know he will say that the form must correspond to a Criminal Code provision. Otherwise, what purpose does it serve? The form is but an adjunct to the legislative provision, the key component.
Mr. Chairman, if you can bear with me for another 30 seconds, I want to stress that the form must correspond to the Code's provisions. Moreover, we have already voted in favour of it.
These are valid arguments that you can use to reverse your position.
Thank you.