Thank you, Madam Chair.
I would like to thank my Conservative colleague, Mr. Moore, for saying that he found the amendment interesting, even though his reasons are different from mine. I would nevertheless like to remind my colleagues who intend to vote against the amendment that if this is something that can bring our Conservative colleagues and I together, even though our respective positions have been at odds from the very outset, it will be a good opportunity for compromise and consensus.
The bill removes the reasonably foreseeable natural death criterion. It is no longer a criterion for access to medically assisted death. However, in order to define the safeguards regime, it is essential to determine whether, when an application for medical assistance in dying is received, the person's death is foreseeable—within 12 months or less—or whether the person has more than 12 months to live. If the latter, the person is subject to the 90-day reflection period. Those who have 12 months or less to live are not necessarily required to comply with the 10-day period nor, if they have followed the applicable provisions, to give their final consent.
In practice, in the field, it allows practitioners to determine foreseeability. It covers all cases and in no way limits access to medical assistance in dying. However, as it is a medical concept, it allows for clarity.
I believe that it makes the bill clearer. I hope that I have convinced my colleagues.