I'm a little bit challenged by your question, sir.
What I understand from some of the committee's other meetings is that there was a suggestion that this amendment would mean that the complainant would not have to provide evidence in court on this issue.
There is nothing in the law that says that the complainant must give evidence. Of course, the Crown can rely on the best evidence it has. In this type of case the complainant almost always has come forward to give evidence. It's even been the case where human trafficking complainants don't want the prosecution to proceed. As we've heard through all these meetings, very often the victims of the crime actually identify with their abusers. If the goal is to protect complainants, to remove that onus from the Crown, I don't think that's a legally sound way to proceed in this matter.