Yes, this kind of defence has not been used often. The fact remains that Crown attorneys have this in front of them when they come to initiate proceedings. They have a certain number of cases to process and proceedings to bring, but they do not have the time to bring all of them. They are assigned to the most important cases, the ones where their chances of success are best. Paragraphs 319(3)(b) and 319(3.1)(b) cause endless problems because they suggest that if the acts were committed for religious reasons, the defence will be valid.
I would like you to tell me simply whether your opinion is that allowing hate speech where religion is used as an excuse is a problem or not.