That's right.
What we have is a bill that the proponent is advertising and justifying using scenarios that are already criminal. The concern that witnesses have and the concern that the Minister of Justice, Arif Virani, has is the effect of passing this bill on conduct that is not criminal now.
What kind of conduct is not criminal and is protected by the Supreme Court decision? It is the scenario I expressed to you, Madam Chair, of a teacher breaking up a fight or being assaulted. We heard—and I know you know many teachers; I think one of them was from your riding or was at least from your province of Nova Scotia—that teachers are increasingly under threat in the classroom and are having to deal with increasing violence in the classroom. Those are not my words; those are the words of the witnesses that we had on this bill.
As Conservatives, we heard that testimony and we crafted an amendment based on the Supreme Court decision that would protect parents and teachers from being criminally charged. This is serious.
At a time of escalating gang violence, drug violence and all the things that are happening, we're dealing with a bill that targets teachers and parents. Let's be clear about that as well. It applies only to section 43. Section 43, which this bill strikes down, applies only to parents and teachers. It says, “Every schoolteacher, parent or person standing in the place of a parent”. We're not talking about the general public. We're talking about teachers and parents. They are the only people protected from assault charges based on this section of the Criminal Code, which this bill will strike down. Now the alarm bells are going off in the department or with the minister, and they realize the teachers are right. The parents are right. This bill is a problem.
We want to be able to say that we eliminated that clause, so now we have to put that clause somewhere else in the Criminal Code. Madam Chair, these are games, and they are the worst kind of games.
I do have one more question for our witnesses. I know the answer to it, but I want to get their perspective as well.
The minister apparently, through Mr. Maloney, has indicated that he will pass legislation at some point. If this private member's bill passes into law and the minister doesn't introduce that legislation or the minister's legislation follows some time after, in that intervening time, are the protections afforded to parents and teachers under section 43 lost with the passage of this bill?