I think the recent decision of the Canadian International Trade Tribunal is a positive development in the sense that it says the government has to prove exactly why it thinks that there is a risk to national security if, for example, we allow judicial review of a particular procurement decision.
Then the tribunal would have to ask, “Is there a problem? What's the problem, and how can we solve it?” It could be solved, for example, by saying, “This and this information will be held as confidential”, or “This particular part of the hearing will be held in camera”.
There are many tools to ensure that information is kept confidential. I don't think there's any major problem with the operation of such tools. We have examples with hearings of the Federal Court on security certificates. They have crafted a procedure to ensure that information that is really related to national security is kept really confidential and, in some cases, is not even disclosed to the lawyer for the person who is the object of a certificate.