Divorce Act  Mr. Speaker, I want to ask a question that relates to the member's statement, if I heard it correctly, that family courts resemble kangaroo courts. It prompted me to think about the problems we have with overly litigious family law matters, that people are prompted to get to court far too quickly and far too often and it has acrimonious consequences, including the ones on children outlined by my friend.

Divorce Act  Mr. Speaker, I want to add something to the debate and then present a question to the member opposite. What we know from the statistics is that this bill highlights some of the things that were mentioned by my friend opposite. She highlighted the issue of making court a last resort.

Divorce Act  Further on that point, Mr. Speaker, it is critical to understand that this legislation would be entrenching specific provisions in law for the first time: a definition of family violence that is expansive, that includes the impact it can have on children even in observing family violence.

Divorce Act  Mr. Speaker, I compliment the member for Mount Royal for his work as chair of the justice committee. He raised something that has not come up to a great extent in the debate thus far, which is the issue of the provision about parenting and presumptions. One or two points were raised earlier today by members of the opposition about their concern that equal parenting was no longer a presumption.

Justice  Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the member's comments in respect of the debate we are having. I would like to emphasize that, under the bill, no one is obligated to consult a lawyer. In fact, through two very specific measures, the bill seeks to do just the opposite. It seeks to ensure that no one is obligated to consult a lawyer.

Justice  Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the member's comments. I also appreciate the fact that towards the end of his speech, he finally decided to talk about the bill before us, instead of talking about various other topics or concerns. I myself will continue to talk about this bill. Maybe we could find an aspect of this bill that both our parties agree on.

Justice  Mr. Speaker, I am sorry to interrupt the member for Beauport—Limoilou in the middle of his speech, but I have to say that it is one thing to discuss Bill C-78, which is now before us, and quite another to give a long speech on NAFTA and the new agreement between Canada, the United States and Mexico and bring supply management into it.

Justice  Mr. Speaker, with respect to the member's comments on child poverty, I will put to her a few important statistics that I have unearthed. Two million Canadian children live in separated or divorced families. Sixty per cent of all cases where there is a maintenance enforcement program involved are in arrears.

Justice  Mr. Speaker, with respect to what the hon. member for Vancouver East identified as a couple of gaps in the bill, through you, I would inform the House that unmarried couples are the exclusive jurisdiction of the provinces and territories, including common-law couples. That is a provincial and territorial matter.

Justice  Mr. Speaker, I confess I find the member's comments quite puzzling. To draw an analogy between this legislation and the Titanic is preposterous, because we had widespread consultations and have since received vociferous support from coast to coast to coast for this legislation.

Justice  Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Willowdale, who happens to be an old high school classmate, gave us a very comprehensive overview of Bill C-78. He touched on many different facets, so I would ask if he could zoom out a bit and provide us with his insight on how the bill fits in with some of the broader initiatives our government is pursuing.

Justice  Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Surrey Centre for the work he is doing on behalf of his constituents. As a lawyer, I also take a lot of solace in the insight he has provided in terms of what the bill would do to address the litigious area that represents family law. He focused a lot of his comments on family violence.

Justice  Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I believe that question is out of order. We are debating Bill C-78. The matter of Bill C-75 was raised in a response made by my friend opposite in the context of the back-and-forth interplay on the dialogue. However, this question is only referencing Bill C-75, not Bill C-78.

Justice  Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the member's comments, both in his speech and in his most recent responses to the question. However, what I would say is that we see strong statements in Bill C-78 with respect to defining family violence for the first time in a much more expansive way.

Justice  Mr. Speaker, I noted that the member acknowledged some of the very strong provisions in the legislation with respect to putting children first and enforcing child support payments. I want to ask him about the bill's impact on women. The context of my question is a couple of statistics.