Thank you, Mr. Chair.
First, I have just a thought on some of Mr. Angus' testimony. It got me thinking about how, recently, this government and the Department of National Defence will go through any means necessary to find out how stories get leaked and how they get out to the media. It just reminded me of that occurrence this week and of how important it is to protect journalistic sources. I think we need to do that, and today there are a couple of amendments here to do that.
For my question, I'd like some clarity from the legislative clerk or the library staff we have here. In looking at the first clause, or proposed section 18.2, as it's referred to in the bill, as Mr. Rathgeber has put it in the bill, it says, “could reasonably be expected to prejudice the Corporation's journalistic, creative or programming independence”. I'd like to go back to the “prejudice” part, because I think we heard testimony in a couple of examples from the commissioner that this type of prejudice or injury-based test is something that is similar to the national security and CSIS issues that come before her.
I was wondering if this wording and the prejudice test are similar to the national security and the CSIS departments', which has been brought to our attention through the deliberations. I was wondering if the analysts or the legislative clerk could tell us if this prejudice test is in any other statute regarding national security. Would this be something that's similar if the clause here goes unamended?