Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Coming back to the importance of protecting journalistic sources, I repeat that we believe the amendment presented by the Conservative Party still fails to address all the concerns that have been submitted to us.
There were other, much more effective ways of doing that, but the Conservatives preferred to head in this direction, thus raising quite serious concerns within the profession across the country. If there had been a genuine concern to enable the Information Commissioner to do her job, we could perhaps have drawn on foreign legislation that grants full authority to obtain documents and determined whether the access to information request is legitimate. Instead of that, they have restricted the definition of "activities" to that of "independence", which has somewhat inflamed the situation.
On this point, the Canadian Media Guild, which is concerned with matters pertaining to the right to information, told us this during the hearings:
We are concerned that the impetus behind Bill C-461 is to strengthen the hand of the CBC's media competitors and to weaken the Corporation's journalistic integrity and ability to protect its confidential sources.
We are really addressing the issue of protection for journalistic sources. Most of the bill's opponents pointed out this particular feature. It did not concern disclosure of the compensation of the most highly paid employees, a point on which most people could agree.
The Guild also said this:
If the supporters of this bill really want the Access to Information system to work better—and we would agree that this is desperately needed—then they should bring forward a comprehensive package for reforming the Act, with careful consideration for how it intersects with the Privacy and Broadcasting acts. For example, the House of Commons and the Senate should be put under the act as they are in most modern freedom to information laws and in other parliamentary democracies…. The Information Commissioner should receive order-making powers….
That is not provided for in the bill or in this amendment. Bill C-461 addresses none of these changes.
The Guild also noted the following:
If one of the objectives of C-461 is to achieve greater transparency about the salaries paid to employees of Crown Corporations, of which the CBC is only one, as well as those of government departments and agencies, then it should address that directly and comprehensively, naming all the departments, corporations and agencies involved and thoroughly examining the relevant privacy issues.
We can also address the issue of the bureaucracy. I recall a comment by Mr. Carmichael that I thought was interesting. He talked about the danger involved in creating a new registry. That is an explosive word, and I do not think the Conservative government intends to create more registries, red tape and bureaucracy.
The Guild also told us this:
Bill C-461 cannot be salvaged—