Well, I would suggest, Madam Chair, that it is incredibly relevant to the conversation we are having, because if Mr. Bittle had read Bill C-270, he would have noted the close parallel to what I am discussing and exactly what we are talking about here today, as well as the fact that Bill C-270 very specifically articulates the need for consequences for egregious actions that have taken place.
The good news, as I described very briefly earlier, is the autonomy that we are granted as members of Parliament. In the guidelines of being able to stay relevant, the Justice Defense Fund, I would suggest, has a particular expertise on the subject at hand. That expertise is being lent to this committee for the purpose of saying that we need to get this done. For the benefit of Mr. Bittle, I'll just emphasize one part of their endorsement of this bill: “This is...urgently needed [and] has the potential to protect thousands, if not millions of individuals, including children, from facing life altering, traumatic, sexual abuse.” I would hope that Mr. Bittle takes that very, very seriously.
I would suggest further, Madam Chair, that, as I think I've outlined quite fairly and have endeavoured to not get super political here.... Now, that will be something that I know some of my colleagues from the other side might have trouble believing. However, when we have a bill that was supported by all members, that has such widespread support.... I would suggest that there are a lot more areas where I could have gotten political, even in what I think could have been a significantly longer intervention thus far. I've endeavoured to keep it as brief as I can, but I want to ensure that we have this very direct understanding of what we are trying to accomplish here. I would suggest that it is key for ensuring that we can actually get it done.
I would just note that one of the aspects of Parliament that we.... Sometimes, it gets a bad rap for not getting any stuff done. If you look at how the Liberals have paralyzed the House of Commons over the last number of months, it's certainly evidence of that. However, I want to stick to Bill C-270 here. This is a chance where we can truly get something accomplished and then get to work at ensuring that it can pass in the other place as well—or what we refer to as “the other place”, that being the upper chamber of Canada's Parliament, the Senate of Canada—where I would hope and certainly have the expectation.... I know that it has addressed a number of bills similar to this in the past and has been able to endorse them, and that certainly gives me some hope that we can get this sorted out.
When it comes to actually getting this done, if this is delayed by 30 days, as the motion that we are discussing here today proposes, all of the things that I've endeavoured to articulate as succinctly as possible get lost, and we have to restart this process. We don't want to do that. We want to actually get stuff done. I think Canadians want to see that this action is, in fact, taken.
I'd like to share a quote, if I could, Madam Chair, from Andrea Heinz. She has this to say:
An integral part of this valuable bill is to focus on our youth and ensure each person whose image is depicted in the material is a consenting 18 years or older. Having worked over 7,000 cases of survivors of human trafficking and their families, it is critical the Criminal Code be amended to ensure the safety of these underaged individuals.
Now, I'm very glad that Mr. Bittle brought up something that has such close relevance to this bill. I would suggest that one of the things that we've heard and that I've certainly heard from constituents in relation to the concerns around Bill C-63 is that it's off the point in terms of actually accomplishing the set objective. I don't think anybody is opposed to what they would suggest the bill accomplishes. However, as they say, the proof is in the pudding.
Here we have an example of how and where I would suggest that bill falls short, and there's a whole host of issues that I don't want to get into here because we're sticking to the very relevant subject matter at hand, although we could probably talk at length about Bill C-63 and some of the issues related to that.
Where Bill C-270 really hits the mark is that it puts very clear parameters into ensuring that there are consequences for bad actors. I would suggest it is that clarity, as I outlined before when I went through the bill, that ensures there is this needed certainty so that Canada marks that line, as I've talked about, that signals to those actors and to the world that Canada is not a haven for these bad actors.
I would just note that in this quote, this individual says she had worked with 7,000 cases of survivors related to human trafficking; that's a big number. That is a lot of individuals who have faced the incredible impact that crime has on victims and those survivors. I would suggest, Madam Chair, that we look at that number and don't just gloss over it, because you're talking about 7,000 individuals who have parents—a mom and a dad—and who have siblings. They have, in some cases, kids, and they have grandparents. Certainly, the number of people impacted by just this individual's work speaks to how important an issue this is to ensure that we're actually addressing the issues that Canadians expect us to be able to address.
I would, Madam Chair, further like to share a quote from the Ottawa Coalition to End Human Trafficking, which says, “This is an issue that requires priority, attention, and dedication on all fronts, and thus far has not been treated in this manner” by Parliament. This is a legislative gap that Bill C-270 will fill in our criminal justice system. “The victims involved in this investigation and the thousands of other victims out there deserve our greatest efforts and support.” Bill C-270 will provide this support in more ways than one. Sometimes you just can't time things better than this, but certainly, when it comes to the issue at hand, we're debating an extension, and the Ottawa Coalition to End Human Trafficking talks about how Bill C-270 fills the gaps as needed.
I would suggest that the simple, straightforward and common-sense solution, while we should have been addressing the issue with witnesses here today, is that we do not want to see this unnecessarily delayed. This is to ensure, as there are organizations like this that are highlighting some of the concerns, that we take the diligence and the need to get this stuff sorted out. In this case, let's get Bill C-270 back to Parliament. We don't need to extend it by 30 days. We need to get it back to Parliament so that, hopefully, it can get passed, or at least so that it has the very best chance of passing before this Parliament comes to an end—although, certainly, if the Liberals just handed over the documents related to SDTC, we'd be back to private members' business, but I digress on that front.
Further to that, I would suggest that there is a—