Thank you for the question.
As I was saying to your colleague Mr. Cooper about Bill C‑8, I expect to be called to give formal recommendations on the subject.
What I can say about Bill C‑2 is that it does indeed give greater powers to authorities to do certain things—sometimes with a warrant, sometimes without one—according to certain criteria. Sometimes the test is reasonable suspicion. Other times, the test is reasonable belief. We are in the process of analyzing all that, and our priority will really be to determine whether, once again, that necessity and proportionality are being met.
We will want to determine whether the criterion is rigorous enough. If we obtain sensitive information on Canadians, the criterion should normally be higher—more rigorous than when the information is not sensitive.
We also need to look at whether there are good privacy practices, for example in terms of information retention. If information is obtained and turns out not to be useful for a prosecution, should it be destroyed? Will appropriate reports be produced so that questions or problems can be raised?
Those are the themes we're looking at for most of the issues around this bill. We want to review the criterion and determine whether it goes too far, whether too much leeway has been granted. We must also ask ourselves that question in light of the Supreme Court's decision in the Bykovets case—because in a similar context, the court ruled that, in some cases, warrantless searches could be problematic in terms of privacy. So we must be cautious.