Article content continued

Conservative MP Kerry-Lynne Findlay indicated support for the bill’s aims, but sought more clarity in the legislation’s wording during a debate last Thursday.

“I understand the intent behind what the honourable member is doing,” she said. “But does he agree with the statement that as legislators we have to be clear? Unfortunately . . . the bill, as drafted, is vague with respect to those central points.”

Garrison said more precise definitions aren’t needed.

“We don’t define sex, we do not define many things. Why should these two terms garner a stronger definition than others?” said Garrison. “The problem is not definition, the problem is that some citizens do not enjoy the full protection of their rights under the law, and the problem is that those Canadians are often subject to discrimination, harassment and violence.”

“Simply put, transgender, transsexual and gender variant Canadians do not have the same degree of protection of their rights and freedoms as all other Canadians,” said Garrison.

Although Garrison said the bill has received support from both Liberal and Green Party members, some critics have dubbed it “the bathroom bill” — a name originally given in 2011, with claims that it would allow male sexual predators, presumably masquerading as women — to invade women’s washrooms and change rooms.

Conservative MP Dean Allison said during last Thursday’s debate that creating a right to gender identity and gender expression would open a door to sexual predators and allow men access to girls’ washrooms.