Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
I'd also like to thank all of our guests. I, too, am always impressed by the high calibre of our witnesses, particularly today, as Mr. Brunelle‑Duceppe pointed out earlier. So I thank them for being with us.
I think we all agree on the principles. What we are trying to do in asking you questions is to try to find the best ways to put the principles we agree on into practice. So I have three questions, which I would ask you to answer quickly.
The first is about the list. I would like to come back to what my colleague Mr. Oliphant was saying earlier. I don't have the kind of experience that many of you have in human rights, but I do have some experience in diplomacy. I think there's a significant difference between, on the one hand, giving the government of a democratic country the discretion it needs to try to save a person's life in the best possible way and, on the other hand, having conditions imposed on it by an authoritarian country.
I have witnessed negotiations or, in some cases, have participated in negotiations where discretion was needed to reach an agreement. In addition, I think my colleague made the point earlier that it's difficult to have a rule that will apply in every case. Sometimes it also takes a certain amount of discretion to find the right way to achieve the objectives. That's the first point I wanted to make.
With respect to the CRTC, I'm obviously not against that principle, but you have to understand that in Canada, we don't have legislation or regulations that enable us to tackle what's happening online, that is to say, all aspects of digital publications. So a system would have to be created. Even if we gave the CRTC the power proposed in Bill C‑219, it would apply only to traditional publications, meaning print media, television and that kind of thing, while everything is moving increasingly online.
So I'd like to hear your thoughts on that. What countries have established those kinds of systems? Would we, for our part, be prepared to work towards that?
My last question is about clause 6 of the bill, which my colleague Mr. Chong was talking about. Once again, it's difficult for governments to dictate strict deadlines for independent tribunals since there can be appeals and reviews.
This is a question that, rather than being very specific, is perhaps directed more generally to you, Ms. McInnes. Legislation cannot replace the power of the courts. So how can we provide a framework for that?