Madam Speaker, I will start off by picking up on the point that was just made about the support for this private member's bill within the chamber, which I perceive as overwhelmingly positive. As members know, there is a limited number of private members' bills and motions that will ultimately hit the floor of the House of Commons.
There are two things that I would point out about the member for Kamloops—Shuswap—Central Rockies. Number one, we need to recognize that an hon. member is very fortunate if they can get a bill passed through the House. A little bit relies on luck, because we have to be part of the draw. If we look at it, the number of the bill is Bill C-221, which tells us that the member has been fortunate to get the bill drawn.
Number two, when one is provided that opportunity, there is a multitude of issues one could bring to the floor of the House. The member has obviously prioritized this as a very important issue. We have seen governments of different political stripes talk about victims. We now have a private member who has brought forward legislation, and he shared a very intimate story. I always appreciate when members have the courage to share a personal story, because it is a very difficult thing to do. It made me reflect on an incident from a number of years ago.
I was at someone's home. Her son was missing, and she had the dreaded knock on the door from local law enforcement. She was told that her son's body had been found. There were the emotions that were tied into that, how she collapsed and how she had the courage to go through a process that is very complicated and exceptionally frustrating. One must imagine the emotions that someone has to live through to really appreciate why it is so important that, when we talk about legislation, we must incorporate the victims of crime.
That is how I see Bill C-221, which is a piece of legislation that ultimately has wide support, not only here in the chamber but, as has been pointed out by my friend across the way, in all sectors of society. I believe that it has that support because people can understand the rationale and the need to see it ultimately pass. I am anticipating that we will take a look at the need not only to be informed but also to have an explanation follow. For example, there could be an explanation for why a parole hearing has been scheduled so we have have a better appreciation of the system.
What I have found, and I used to be the justice critic in the province of Manitoba, is that there is a general lack of knowledge of the whole process of how our judicial system actually works. I have had the opportunity to raise it here on the floor of the House on several occasions. There is indeed federal, provincial and municipal processes, not to mention the many different stakeholders.
On the whole issue of drinking and driving, there is a phenomenal organization called MADD, Mothers Against Drunk Driving. There are so many stakeholders out there that are all trying to improve the system. A part of improving the system is through education. As complicated as it is, imagine being thrown into a position where something horrific has taken place in one's life, and one finds oneself having to go through a process that is exceptionally emotionally difficult to deal with, and one wants to find out what has happened to the perpetrator.
On the surface, the legislation comes across as very straightforward, as it is. In the question I posed, I hope it was implied that I am very supportive of this private member's bill. As has been pointed out, there was previous legislation that, for whatever reasons, did not get royal assent, along with other pieces of legislation. However, this does not take away from the efforts being presented to us today by a member highlighting the issue once again.
I reflect on Bill C-11, which is important legislation that also deals with victims' rights. It would transfer from the military courts to the civilian courts cases of sexual abuse and provide the support victims require, with the appointment of a victim's liaison officer to help facilitate the transfer.
This demonstrates very clearly that, whether it is a private member's bill or government-sponsored legislation, there is a certain expectation before us as legislators. That is ultimately to see legislation go to committee; if there is a need to make changes or amend it, then we should look at that.
I was encouraged to hear what the member from the Bloc put forward as a question, because I thought the same thing too. I wondered why information would not just be sent automatically. This seemed to make sense. What made more sense was the response. At the end of the day, I am sure there are individuals who do not necessarily want to know or to be reminded.
The true value of going to a standing committee, whether it is a private member's bill or a government bill, is that we are afforded the opportunity to have the dialogue necessary among the legislators. In a very short answer, I support the answer, and I do not necessarily support an amendment that would actually change it.
I look forward to the legislation going to committee. As has been implied, there might be some other potential amendments that could be brought forward. I would trust that any amendments would have, at least in principle, the support of the member and be within the scope of the legislation. What we ultimately hope to achieve, going through standing committees, is to have that dialogue. At the same time, and this is what I would like to highlight, we have to listen to what the stakeholders are saying. We need to listen to those interest groups and the victims themselves and at least afford the opportunity for them to be able to come to committee and possibly share their experiences, as the member for Kamloops—Shuswap—Central Rockies shared his personal story with the House.
I really believe that we need to do what we can as legislators to support the victims of crime. I applaud the member for bringing the bill forward.