Justice committee  Yes.

Justice committee  I would say that transmission data goes beyond information that was found in the old phone books. It has that, but it has more than that. It may not have the content of conversations, which is a good thing, but it has information about the location of individuals, sites being consulted, several types of information, which are way beyond what was found in phone books, that I do think is personal data and deserves higher protection than suspicion.

Justice committee  Mr. Chair, that goes back to the suggestion that I'm making for further review of the specific details of what this bill entails from a practical perspective. You're referring, sir, to testimony by the police, which tends to understand the definition of transmission data in a very narrow way.

Justice committee  I have not, I must admit, read their testimony, being new to the position. I do think that there are issues that still require some examination. Perhaps Madame Kosseim would like to elaborate here.

Justice committee  Yes.

Justice committee  One of our concerns with the amendment to the immunity clause through Bill C-13 is that it takes away a current requirement that immunity exists in the course of investigations, and that is no longer the case in the clause being proposed to you. To us, that is a concern. Certainly, to broaden the immunity clause sends a strong signal to telecommunications companies, to enhance the kind of voluntary disclosure that is currently occurring.

Justice committee  I'm still new to the job. I don't know, but perhaps one of my colleagues can answer that question.

Justice committee  Yes.

Justice committee  Not at this point.

Justice committee  I would repeat that we are in favour of legislation modernizing techniques. My understanding is that the group in question, although they were recommending to modernize legislation on transmission of data, preservation of data, etc., did not make any specific recommendations on the legal thresholds, for instance, for accessing data.

Justice committee  I actually have not seen the exact language of the motion, but absolutely, as we said in our submission filed before the committee yesterday, we are of the view that if Parliament decides not to divide the bill, which would be ideal from our perspective, the next best thing would be to adopt a clause that would require a parliamentary review of the new statute after a period of time.

Justice committee  That is not unreasonable at all.

Justice committee  We would agree that a requirement to report would be a useful addition to the legislation. We have referred in our submission to an example of a report on electronic surveillance that has been around for quite a while, since 1977 I understand. We think that kind of report would be very useful.

Justice committee  I am not at this point.

Justice committee  Thank you for the question. Mr. Chairman, from the list you describe I readily accept there has been a serious examination of this bill. At the same time I see that many people who appeared before you have suggested the bill be divided, and I would suggest it is perhaps for the reasons I alluded to earlier.