Fair enough. It would apply to anybody under 18, generally.
The second area is that a child who gives evidence is permitted to testify outside of a courtroom. In law, we call this a “presumptive application”. It's made under section 486.2 of the Criminal Code. If a judge hears that application, they are presumed to make it, or they should make it, unless they have a really good reason. I'm using my own words here. The same doesn't go for adults who testify. We hear about trauma and people who are.... When you see the person who has offended against you, it must be incredibly triggering. An adult can still make that application to testify outside of a courtroom, but when it comes to children, it is what we call “presumptive”. It's almost always made.
Do you think that if the application was presumptive with respect to adults—in this case, that it should be made—this would help adult victims? It would give them the right to testify from outside of a courtroom, and that would be presumed. There wouldn't be that initial fight. Essentially, the law is recognizing that you're already alleged to have been through so much trauma that we are not going to bring you face to face with the accused, but you are just as much part of the process. In your view, would that be of assistance?