Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just want to comment, if I could, on the suspending of driver’s licences for individuals who are in default of maintenance payments. The bill will pass, and it’ll go ahead, but I wanted to get my comments on record anyway. I

do believe that even though

individuals owe maintenance payments we shouldn’t be so heavy-handed as to suspend a driver’s licence, especially when in some cases that parent has access to their children and needs to

pick them up, drive them to soccer, drive them to hockey, and it’s 40 below zero outside.

If somebody’s fallen on hard times, I think we’re limiting a person’s ability and access to their children, and to me that’s wrong. I would never as a legislator get in the way of a parent spending time with their children, whether the parent is in default on maintenance or not. The time they spend with their children: you cannot put a price on that. It’s time that’s lost. Once it’s gone, it’s lost. If we’re taking away a person’s driver’s licence, we’re taking away their ability to get their kids, to pick up their kids, to spend time with their kids. We’re impacting the person’s quality of life. To me that’s not fair and it’s not just.

Again, I’m not sure how other Members feel about this, but I do feel strongly about taking away somebody’s driver’s licence. I’m glad to see the provisions are spoken to and that for work and for medical reasons a person can drive a vehicle. But we also should include provisions to pick up their children, to take them to sports or a play or school, and to spend time with them. That needs to be in there as well, and if it’s not we’re doing society a disservice.