Thank you, again, Mr. Chair.
Just to clarify, Mr. Thibeault referred to hundreds of people calling and that might be grounds for an investigation, but under this legislation, as proposed, nobody would have to call. And nobody even has to make a complaint; the commissioner just decides that they're going to launch an inquiry into a certain sector and it happens. That's what's wrong with it.
We wouldn't allow this in any other area of law. We wouldn't allow the police to determine that a particular segment of society is more prone to criminal activity, so we're just going to investigate all of them, but that's what this does.
From a competitive standpoint, it does that. It basically says, “Hey, you know what? We think maybe this particular industry.... ” Well, we don't even know what the grounds are because they're not listed, but maybe there's just a suspicion in the commissioner's office, and we just allow them to go out there and investigate an entire industry. I think that's what's wrong with this bill.
Then there's a significant cost attached to every member of the industry. And again, there's a significant label attached...just like there would be a label attached to that specific segment of society that is being investigated for whatever nefarious criminal activity they might be involved in because of profiling. We don't allow that because it's labelling. It's very detrimental to society to do that. I think in this case it's exactly the same thing.
The question we have to ask here is, what's the problem we're trying to solve?
Mr. Janigan, if you could, maybe you can tell us, other than the grounds already demarcated in this existing law, what grounds are missing?