Right.
So this is not a matter of going after a really narrow, remote situation. It's a matter of saying that I'm just worried that we haven't fully thought through what the exceptions could be.
For example, grandparents are not strangers, right? From the beginning, Mr. Wilks was using the words “not a stranger”. His word was “stranger”. The list we have here, of “parent, guardian or person having the lawful care or charge”, is not the inverse of “stranger”. It's an under-inclusive list with respect to what he said he didn't want to have happen.
I'm just a bit worried that we're maybe doing this a bit too quickly and that we could benefit from another session where we either talk it through a bit more, after having reflected a bit, including with expert assistance, or think through whether we need a little bit more expertise.
I'm not trying to be obstructionist. I'm just a bit worried that I personally have not thought this through enough, having seen it just so recently. It doesn't seem to map onto the stranger idea.