Mr. Speaker, we now possess all the tools necessary to create an approach that would punish true offenders while protecting farmers, hunters and researchers. But this is not what the government wants to see.
We are of the view that not including the defences found in subsection 429(2) of the criminal code in the new part V.1 will have the effect of depriving those who legally kill or cause pain to animals of the protection they are currently afforded.
Section 429 of the criminal code is clear. It says that legal justification or excuse and colour of right constitute specific protection to whomever takes part in a legitimate and legal activity. It is therefore essential to include these specific safeguards in the provisions of new part V.1 of the criminal code.
According to Department of Justice officials, subsection 8(3) of the criminal code should apply. They say that defences of legal justification or excuse or colour of right are implicit in section 8. Why not include them explicitly in the bill as the entire animal industry is requesting? It is completely illogical to refuse to do so. These protections are not implicit because they are explicit only for certain sections of the criminal code, specifically section 430 and those which follow.
The Bloc Quebecois is adamant about this. The means of defence now provided for in section 429 of the criminal code must be included in new part V.1 of the criminal code.
In addition, we are of the view that going back to committee for consideration of this point is more than necessary. It is vital to ensure that the bill truly meets the needs of all parties.
The committee proceedings must be entirely democratic in order to consider all the effects of this problem of cruelty to animals. In addition, it is our role in committee to ensure that there will be no possible conflict in interpretation of the new provisions.
Unfortunately, today the government has brought in a motion for closure. Unfortunately, we know what is going to become of this amendment to the amendment.