Mr. Chairman, I find that this bill ...If Mr. Patterson is talking about the inherent right of this Assembly, this bill and the intent of this bill is already in the act of the Assembly; all we're doing is making it more specific. What I'm doing is trying to attempt to close a loophole. For example, nothing is stopping some sophisticated individual from this Assembly from being found guilty of an offence, getting a good lawyer --whether it's O.J. Simpson's lawyer or whomever --to come in and basically plead for a conditional discharge, taking into account that the Member could lose their seat, they could be publicly embarrassed and the judge may have sympathy and give that Member a conditional discharge after that Member may have slapped his or her spouse around.
I think the intent of this bill was to remove Members who conducted themselves in that manner. If you get a conditional discharge, basically you're allowing those Members to sit in the House. I think we're, again, creating double standards for ourselves. What I'm trying to do is be specific: it you're found guilty of a violent offence of or an offence involving sexual exploitation of children, then you're guilty and you should be out of the House. No ifs, ands or buts. That's the intent of this amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I think I've made it fairly clear that I don't think we can allow ourselves to set double standards among Members because no Member is better than the other; we're all elected by our constituents to represent them. I certainly hope that Members will consider this amendment and support the amendment. With that, Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask for a recorded vote. Thank you.