First of all, Mr. Chair, I have one more question.
I would just like to know if we all understand each other. I agree, I would be willing to give my consent for there to be a change, but I would like to make sure that everybody understands what we are talking about.
I have some questions for Ms. Atwin. Does she want to talk about the representativity of gender identities? Is that what she wants to add? Wait, excuse me: I said “representativity”, but I meant parity of gender identities. That's my understanding of her amendment, but I'm not sure.
At this point, would she amend paragraph 12(d) of the bill, where it also talks about gender-diverse persons? It doesn't talk about parity, it talks about the inclusion of gender-diverse persons. I was talking earlier about the need to be consistent.
So what she is proposing would replace the idea of male-female gender parity. I was talking about biological sex. Here, we want to talk about gender identities, not gender parity. There may be a crossroads, but as I understand it, that's what they want to see added.
There are several questions here. I would like some clarification and to know if I have understood correctly what Ms. Atwin wants to do with her amendment. I would also like to know whether she wants, for the sake of consistency, her intention to be reflected also in paragraph 12(d), where it talks about representation.