We have mentioned diligence in verification. I think that it was Ms. Johnson who mentioned mens rea, but my question perhaps goes more to the Federation of Law Societies of Canada. As I am not a lawyer, I will not get into legal terminology too much, but I would like to ask about the difference between the two paradigms. The current approach is based on mens rea, meaning that there has to be proof of criminal intent. With diligence in verification, all that is needed is to make sure that the lawyer or notary has not turned a blind eye to a situation that, to any even marginally intelligent person, could appear suspect.
Can you explain the difference between the two approaches? What is the current situation? Should we move to a system based more on diligence in verification instead?