Mr. Speaker, I have a few short comments to make on this topic.
I find it passing strange that included in the motion is a clause saying that the joint committee made up of senators and members of the House of Commons be given the authority to incur travel costs. There is a cute little phrase in it saying “inside and outside the country”.
I am not sure whether they will find it necessary to meet over in some foreign countries. Perhaps in the middle of winter it would be nice to go south and have a government paid trip. Maybe this is what is contemplated. I sincerely hope not. I find it strange that the government should include in the motion the phrase that they should be able to travel outside the country as well. Surely what we should be looking at is the experience, the needs and the aspirations of Canadian parents.
We have many children who are the products of relationships where the parents are not married to each other. I am not sure the motion will direct the committee to look at the implications of that. Many of those couples stay together for a while. They produce one, two or more children, fall into disagreement and walk away from each other. Those children are just as much at risk as those who suffer the experience of a divorce.
I do not know if all members have had experience with couples who have gone through this, but my wife and I have. It is heart wrenching to see the children being jerked around.
My last comment in this extremely short intervention, which I know is unusual for me, is that I think we need to pay attention to equality. We have heard many times today the expression—and I know it is often true—that women are automatically assumed to be the best parent and the fathers are cut out. Now there is a cry to bring equalization into it so that fathers also have access to their children and the children to their fathers. That is a noble goal.
My concern is that when it comes to judging these matters it is a false assumption that the courts always evaluate it correctly. Sometimes we land up with built-in prejudices and biases. I am afraid that perhaps the bias could go the other way so that in these cases family court judges would have a predilection to choosing fathers instead of mothers for equal or greater advantage. That may not necessarily be the case.
I simply urge that in all studies like this one we truly urge objectivity and a true evaluation. That would include much more than just highly paid, court appointed counsellors and psychologists, very frankly some of whom I am not convinced are really competent in their job. Once again the children are the ones who suffer.
These are the few comments I wanted to make in the moments available to me.