Thank you, Madam Chair.
I have a number of points, but I'm not sure whether they're all connected or not.
First of all, I thank Madame Demers for bringing the motion forward and for the passion and her willingness to speak out so frequently on the issues related to women and children and the injustices that she sees falling on them. To even suggest that she doesn't care about children is, to my mind, heresy.
Having said that, I have a real problem moving forward with it, certainly without the full information--that in itself. Someone made the comment about what the role of this committee is and what the role of government is. We have issues related to sharia law that could well come before this committee; they have in the past and they are of a significant concern. My own view, and it's my view, is that our role in terms of commenting on the activity of any religious group—Catholic, Muslim, Jewish, whatever—is only pertinent when the role of government and the law intersect with the issue. I believe in this case government does not intersect with it; it's an internal church matter.
As I say, I have great respect for the commitment and passion that Madame Demers brings to the issue.
I have with me some other articles that I have gleaned where there have been many other inappropriate behaviours by the church, whether it relates to children, young women or young boys. I have one particular one as it relates to young boys. I don't know that it's our role to comment on the church's activity unless the government or the legal system impacts on it.
That would be my position, and I was asking for clarification in terms of canon law. We're asked about whether we believe we should comment on it or not; we're asked to make a decision based on conflicting information. So that's my point.