Thank you so much, Madame Dhillon. I appreciate that.
I believe that committees should ask questions and then allow time for a response. Perhaps I am old school that way.
Since the split decision of the Supreme Court more than 20 years ago, we have seen 60 countries ban physical force used against children. They include almost all of our major allies. I cited Wales, Scotland, Ireland and New Zealand earlier, but there's also Sweden, Finland, Norway, Germany, France—I could go on and on and read the entire list of countries that have gone that way.
Call to action number 6 from the Truth and Reconciliation Commission is something that all parties around the table have committed to. They committed to implementing the calls to action.
The reason I quoted Murray Sinclair, who is renowned, is that he spoke about the impacts of section 43, which dates back to 1892. Again, we're not talking about fresh legislation; we're talking about something that comes from the 19th century. There's a reason there has been so much pressure to repeal section 43 from all the major organization in Canada, including all the major health care organizations and all the major organizations that are trying to facilitate development of our youth, and so much consensus. It's because, as we'll see in the second hour of the discussion, all the peer-reviewed science shows the negative impacts on children of allowing the use of physical force against children.
My final point, which I mentioned at the outset, is that there are a number of provisions in the Criminal Code that allow individuals who are protecting children, who are defending themselves or another person, or who are protecting property.... Those sections of the Criminal Code apply.
I find the argument of Mr. Moore—though I have a lot of respect for him—disingenuous, because the facts and the science prove otherwise.