Thank you, Madam Chair.
Ms. Cartwright and Ms. Coyle, thank you for joining us today.
I had some questions, but I want to focus on the issues raised by my colleague, Mrs. Brière. I'm wondering about some kind of trap when it comes to children. I don't want to make a faulty comparison, but more or less the same reasoning applies in the case of children and animals. I gather that conduct towards children wouldn't be punished, but that children would be indirect victims, a bit like an animal facing threats. For example, a spouse tells his partner that, if she doesn't do what he says, her dog will suffer. Understandably, the dog would become a type of indirect victim. That said, the victim of the controlling and coercive behaviour is the partner.
Doesn't the same reasoning apply to children? As you rightly said, the child is bound to be affected by any charges against a parent or by a criminal trial. Do you consider the child an indirect victim of the situation between the two parents?
Should a parent's controlling and coercive behaviour towards a child, even if the parent doesn't have a spouse, constitute an offence under this bill?