I just happened to be reading something, and I want to give you the scenario, because it gave me some cause for concern about the way this is drafted. I'm particularly concerned about the wording, the phraseology, of exploitation.
I know of a situation in England in which a person was convicted. A woman, who is the mother of three sons, arranged for brides, for arranged marriages, to come to England. Then she exploited their labour quite viciously. She was convicted of that and sentenced, but not for trafficking. The marriages actually did take place, although there was, from what I could tell, no relationship that existed after the technical marriage. In that kind of scenario, would exploitation apply? She was exploiting their labour, not paying them, and the rest of it.
Would this bill apply to that?