Thank you so much, Madam Chair, and our witnesses.
I'm here on behalf of my colleague Mr. Randall Garrison today. On his behalf, I want to go along the line of why exactly we still have paragraph 98(c) in the act. Our witnesses clearly identified the fact that only two cases, I believe, were prosecuted in the last 20 years. Is it setting the wrong tone by treating self-harm as a disciplinary matter rather than a mental health concern? I realize mental health issues are very complex and there's a very wide spectrum.
Maybe our witnesses can inform the committee. Has there just been a general reluctance to engage with paragraph 98(c)? Is there anything you can provide that would illuminate us on that?
Thank you.