I'm not sure, Mr. Cohen, if this is to you or Mr. Hoover, but I'm concerned about a number of things. The constitutionality with regard to the division of power really concerns me. If you look at some of the exchanges we've had at the meetings between the federal government and the provincial attorneys general over the last couple of decades, they've always been very careful about protecting the administration of justice as their territory, which it obviously is under the Constitution. I think we may be infringing on that, but even more so on the charter.
I've been told that the direction to the department to put these five bills into one came just 48 hours before this session of Parliament started. I don't know when the decision was made. Will you confirm that you got only 48 hours' notice to put these together? That's my first question.
Question number two is, when was the decision made to incorporate the breach of supervision order as a triggering event?
The third one—and I guess this is the one that disturbs me the most—is what kind of consultation went on? We heard from Mr. Cooper when he testified. Here you have the person who prosecutes in a region more than anybody in the country right now. He came forward and said, look, what I really need are amendments to part XXIV so I have access to better evidence to prosecute these applications. He said if he got those amendments they would be of immeasurable assistance.
The other point he made in his testimony was that he really wasn't going to change his practice if these amendments went through. So why are we doing this, and why didn't we pay attention to people like him and do amendments to part XXIV, which would have made his job easier?