That's kind of you. Thank you.
On the subject of overly broad definitions, clause 33 may also be problematic. It stipulates that complaints to the new commission must be made within one year of the day on which the alleged incident occurred. The deadline can be extended if there are good reasons for doing so and it is not contrary to the public interest.
The terms “good reasons” and “public interest” are not defined in Bill C‑20.
Do you think the committee should define those terms? Would extending the deadline be in the public interest? What would constitute a good reason for extending the deadline?
As it stands, it's not really clear. Would you agree?