Justice committee  Of course.

Justice committee  I'm sure that a lot of police officers do.

Justice committee  That's a perfect example of a provision that's necessary and effective because it would allow the police to not.... Look, when we say “fishing expedition”, we don't mean that the police are randomly going and seeking information.

Justice committee  No. That's not what I mean, and that's not what the courts have said when they speak about police fishing expeditions. What we want to avoid is the police obtaining personal and private information based on their spidey senses, which happens all the time, and the courts have a di

Justice committee  Well, unfortunately, spidey senses don't amount to reasonable and probable grounds, and the courts have found that acting on spidey senses or mere suspicion is what leads to evidence being excluded. When police act on their spidey senses and don't have the requisite reasonable

Justice committee  Yes. That's what I'm imploring you to do in this bill, to change that and add that.

Justice committee  Show me the notification in this bill. It's not there.

Justice committee  You know that notification under wiretap provisions and the sections in here are completely different; there is no notification provision in here.

Justice committee  That happens.

Justice committee  The courts have found as such. I think with the definition of fishing expedition, you might be a bit wrong on that.

Justice committee  I think there are some important aspects in Bill C-13. Obviously, new provisions are needed to modernize the Criminal Code and to deal with some of the instances that we've heard about. Ideally, we could split the bill and fully consider the implications of the lawful access par

Justice committee  For once no, I think.

Justice committee  I think that's a troubling aspect. It's not just the collection of the information; it's also the retention of the information. As we've seen, with the more information you have, the more information you're able to store with modern tools. There's cross-referencing and checking,

Justice committee  Yes. What we're looking at under PIPEDA is that with regard to the information disclosed for the purposes of law enforcement, there's no necessity to disclose to the person who you're talking about, who the information pertains to. Bill S-4 takes it a step further, of course, and

Justice committee  I don't agree. I think a reading of the legislation would logically lead one to that conclusion. The minister said that the obligation to disclose to an individual when their information has been disclosed was covered under PIPEDA. It's not. It's quite clear, when you look at PI