First, I must say, in my view, journalistic sources will be protected anyway. I think they're protected under the current act, and I think they will be protected under the proposed bill as well. You have to look at the act as a whole. Section 19 of the act protects personal information as well. It's also a provision we use in matters of human sources, for instance in national security matters.
As far as I'm concerned, the fact that it's a discretionary exemption would still protect journalistic sources. The fact that I am allowed to review documents does not mean they will be disclosed. It doesn't address your colleague's point.
I must seriously admit that the idea of having a new amendment that would make an exclusion to a discretionary exemption—and I have not seen it. Having spent several years in litigation to try to assess how an exception to an exclusion applies is a little bit of.... Seriously, operationally, I would rather not see that. I would certainly prefer to see a proposed amendment before that's done, especially since I think it's not necessary to protect journalistic sources.