a) an organization can now collect personal information without knowledge or consent for the purpose of making a disclosure to a government agency that has requested the information...and
b) an organization may now collect information on its own initiative to make a subsequent disclosure to a government agency for the aforementioned purposes.
That's the legal interpretation we have of this clause. We should all be concerned.
I think we're muddying the waters, if I may say, by using the example of the pedophile abusing a child in real time and the possibility of terrorist, national security issues. That's what I'm focusing on. I told the RCMP that I could relate to and sympathize with that example--drop all the rules out the window to save that kid. In the case of fishing around a person's private affairs on the suspicion that they may be remotely connected to some possible terrorist initiative, that's what worries me.