Yes, you are; the English wording is much longer than the French wording. As I see it, the real problem is that the amendment originally proposed by the government does not have the same meaning.
that have in English of the word “reckless”.
I do not think the word “souciant” is an accurate translation.
The point I'm making is that I don't see the concept of “reckless” in the English version. I have to apologize to the committee that I didn't look at the French version at all when I did this drafting; I just looked at the English.
But I don't see the French concepts that use the word “souciant” are anywhere near as clear a translation of the concept of “reckless”. In fact the French version may be satisfactory in terms of what I'm trying to accomplish, which is a clear recognition that the person who is committing the offence is how we're going to define recklessness. “Souciant ”, in French, may catch that concept fairly accurately.
The bottom line is that I'm not sure we need the French amendment; we do need the English one in order for “reckless” to be more clearly defined.