Thanks very much for sharing that and for the question.
As I said before, it's a question of really just naming misinformation and disinformation. It's also about offering empathy and understanding—understanding that, as elected officials, you're representing everybody in your constituency and that there are gay, queer, trans and bi people in your constituency. Understand that all of your constituents deserve the same rights.
In terms of existing discriminatory positions and thoughts, we have to come back to facts. We have to come back to laws and the charter. These things matter, and they need to be held up. This is where, like I mentioned before, the use of the notwithstanding clause to get around some of those things is a very dangerous precedent that we're seeing in many different instances—its either being used or being alluded to as a way of getting around that.
Again, it's just having conversations based on fact, empathy and equity, and it's really aiming to represent all Canadians as as our elected officials are supposed to, based on the charter. That would be my quick answer to your question.