Thank you, Madam Chair.
I would also like to thank all the witnesses who are joining us today. I know that it's not easy to participate virtually, but their testimony is precious for informing our thought process on this bill, on both sides, regardless of the position they hold.
I would like to continue the discussion with Mr. Schutten about his concern.
Once again, I also understand that everyone seems to agree in saying that conversion therapies must be banned. According to certain witnesses, we should go further and ban them for everyone and not only for minors and those who are being forced to participate. That's one thing.
Conversely, some would want to allow objective discussions in good faith with young people, for instance. What comes to mind first are discussions between a pastor and young children in the community. We are concerned because we understand that the pastor has a certain amount of influence over the community.
The minister is telling us that he wants to allow good faith conversations. I see those conversations as non-interventionist. These are objective discussions where no attempt is being made to influence individuals on what their gender identity should or should not be. I may be wrong, but that is how I see it.
So here is my question for Mr. Schutten: would I not be correct in thinking that, in those good faith discussions, a pastor would necessarily tend toward wanting to influence the individual on what their gender identity or sexual orientation should be? Wouldn't the pastor be biased?