Madam Speaker, let us look at the aspect of the legislation that would enable people to have a higher sense of comfort in knowing that they cannot be denied an opportunity to practise their faith and do not have to worry about issues of intimidation and obstruction, such as blocking an entrance to a church, a mosque or a synagogue. Having a stand-alone hate offence is a positive thing.
In terms of stand-alone offences, again, a hate-motivated offence would deal with, for example, assaulting someone because of who they are. That is why I started my comments by saying that no one should feel unsafe because of who they are. This legislation would deal with that particular issue. It is substantive. It means a great deal.
Then, we have the Conservatives, who say, “Well, we want to stick to the issue of being able to quote scriptures, from whatever faith it might be.” I stood and spoke to this at second reading, and I quoted from the Charter of Rights. Do members remember one of the emails that I read out? The Conservatives try to say that they are the defenders of the Charter of Rights. It was the Liberal Party in government, years ago, that brought in the Canadian Charter of Rights. We are the party of the Charter of Rights. If we look at the beginning of the Charter of Rights, we see that it guarantees religious freedom. It is in our charter.
Show me a Supreme Court ruling that has actually not allowed what many members of the Conservative Party are telling people that their party would change. Show me something regarding a leader within a church, a mosque or a synagogue. Of course, they are not going to be able to do that, because, at the end of the day, when we listen to what they are saying, they want to give the sense that a person who belongs to a Bible club or wants to sit around in a small group and talk about their faith could end up going to jail.