Thank you, Madam Chair. I will speak in support of this amendment.
I want to reiterate a point that Ms. Findlay made, also as a lawyer, that in order to execute a valid will, two witnesses are required. Here we're talking about the most significant procedure that could be undertaken in someone's life, namely to end their life, and the safeguard required would be less than that which is required to execute a valid will.
I can say that when Bill C-14 was debated, there was widespread consensus around the need for there to be two witnesses, and not only two witnesses, but two independent witnesses.
The legislation that the government has put forward not only removes the very common-sense requirement that there be two witnesses, but it goes further than that and removes the requirement that there be independent witnesses. Indeed, under Bill C-7, someone attending to a patient's health could be a witness. That obviously raises concerns around conflict of interest, coercion—subtle coercion, unintended coercion—having regard for the power imbalance that exists, for example, between a medical health professional and a patient, particularly vulnerable persons.
The evidence that we heard at committee, in the very limited hearings we held on this bill, was overwhelming in terms of support for maintaining this safeguard, including from the Canadian palliative care association, among other witnesses.
I have not seen any convincing evidence to demonstrate that the witness requirement in any significant way impedes access to physician-assisted dying. On that basis, I believe this is an important safeguard to protecting vulnerable persons. That was backed up by the evidence. On that basis, I hope that this committee sees fit to pass this amendment.
Thank you, Madam Chair.