I propose that the difficulty we're having, Mr. Chair and Mr. Ménard, is the fact that we have an administrative law that ends up with criminal law sanctions without the criminal law process, and this is something that has been developed in the face of a modern phenomenon. I know the Supreme Court has ruled that these certificates are valid, etc.; however, I think the challenge to legislators is not the same challenge as to the Supreme Court.
A few years ago we passed this law, and it was up to the court to interpret what we meant. I was here when we passed this law, and at the time I wasn't 100% sure that this was such a good thing or that it was very carefully thought through and that every clause of it synthesized perfectly with every other clause. In sitting through these hearings, I'm seeing that this is the main problem. We have an administrative law that ends up with criminal law sanctions without the person involved going through the criminal law process.
We have a chance to improve it here, and Mr. Ménard, in all his experience, is making a suggestion. It seems to me that the challenge for legislators is to be creative about how they build laws. They revise them, they amend them, they reform them over time, and they try to make them better. It seems to me that we have in front of us what was essentially a hybrid between two completely different kinds of law and that Mr. Ménard is coming up with a solution to cause some synthesis to be built in. I thank him for the thinking he has done and the explanation he has made, and I will be supporting his amendment.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.