Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
I want to start by saying that I'm very much of the mind, coming out of committee, that we need an amendment in a different section of the code to deal with the very valid concerns that teachers and others have brought related to parental authority.
However, I'm also very mindful of the fact that repealing section 43 itself is a very important goal of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, and we don't achieve that goal by replacing section 43. That amendment, as the teachers themselves recommended, has to be in a different section of the code. We're not able, at this committee, to have a receivable amendment. I drafted one that is similar to the Conservatives' amendment reflecting the Supreme Court judgment, which would be receivable, because we can't amend a different section of the code from the one that is actually being debated at committee. I didn't submit it, because I figured it was not receivable. There's no point.
I'm very comforted by the fact that the minister has undertaken to put forward an amendment to a different section of the code to deal with the very valid concerns teachers have raised. I think that not having the codification of the Supreme Court interpretation of the original section is a problem. I hope that what we can do today is pass the bill, have a later coming into force date of the bill, and work to ensure the minister tables it and we get something passed that comes into force simultaneously with this bill. That would be my hope.
As to the amendment itself, I agree with Mr. Garrison's comments about the last part of Mr. Fortin's amendment. Therefore, I wouldn't have supported this amendment regardless.
Thank you, Madam Chair.