Well, I think there is, Mr. Lawton.
Look at what's happening in the United Kingdom right now. Remember, there's no entrenched right to freedom of expression in the United Kingdom. They don't have anything like the charter, which creates that right. There, you have speech that purportedly abrogates the dignity of individuals or groups. That's the basis for complaints to the police. Arrests are being made on that basis.
That's what the language in Whatcott, which is left out of the definition in proposed subsection 319(7), would allow. It's precisely that people can make complaints that what someone is saying is hatred. The reason why it's hatred is that it's an intentional attempt to infringe on their dignity as an individual or member of a protected group.
We've seen quite a lot of this in the United Kingdom, particularly with very charged issues, such as competing rights around what's called gender identity issues and women's rights. They have had many people who felt like they were engaging in good faith and are now the subject of visits from the police and arrested because of a complaint that what they said and the way they engaged on this issue is detrimental to the dignity of the people with whom they engage.