Thank you to the member across for his comments.

Contained in this bill, Bill 26, the NDA language is very clear that it only is precluded after a court or arbitrator has found wrongdoing. So the bill still allows an employer, a union or an employee to sign an NDA at any time until a court arbitrator decision is issued. My question is, why is your government allowing this massive loophole to exist? Why are you not banning all NDAs?

Thank you to the member from Spadina–Fort York for his comments. I want to ask a question with respect to NDAs, because we’ve heard the government members talk about how the NDAs are now going to be curtailed or they’re going to be banned in this bill, but that’s not the case. NDAs still exist under this legislation.

In Prince Edward county, one of the first provinces in Canada to do so, they’ve actually enacted legislation to stop non-disclosure agreements from being used to protect perpetrators of sexual violence. What is stopping this government from actually closing that loophole? Because they haven’t gone far enough, clearly. But why is it that they won’t go far enough? Do you know the answer to that?

I don’t know why this government is leaving this loophole around the non-disclosure agreements. The way it’s phrased right now, with this legislation, somebody could be asked or coerced to sign a non-disclosure agreement before the legal process is complete. That’s a huge gap. That’s a loophole in this legislation that I hope the government will address in committee.

That’s why I’m very supportive of my colleague’s consent awareness bill to declare a consent awareness week so that we have an ongoing educational program on campuses and across this province to raise awareness about sexual assault so that we can try to curtail it through education.

The question about this bill is that it doesn’t go far enough. The measures that are there are fine, but they’re not actually going to stop sexual assault on campus, which has got to be the goal—