Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you very much, Ms. Moore, and Mr. Taylor, for being here. I had one more question for the minister, so I will direct it your way. It is regarding the reference case.
I'm certainly not an expert in constitutional litigation. My understanding—and correct me if I'm wrong—is that if somebody wants to challenge the legislation, it need not be based on the specific instance before the court. It could be on a reasonable hypothetical. Is that in accord with your understanding as well?
It is.
The minister did speak about the fact that, in his words—and I'm paraphrasing—they will be quite rare, but a reasonable hypothetical doesn't necessarily have to come before the court with that rare case; it can simply be argued with that rare case.
Do you get where I'm going with that? Okay.
This isn't an instance of our simply being in a situation of a rare case that's going to be litigated and even more of a rare case that strikes it down; this is an instance in which it could be a rare case that is litigated and put forward as a reasonable hypothetical that's not before the court.
Would that not suggest that perhaps we should be going to the Supreme Court of Canada on a reference case to ensure that we get this right? I obviously voted for the legislation, so you know where I stand, but I just want to have the tightest legislation possible.
If you could comment on that, please, I would appreciate it.