I would think also that there's already in the Canadian system a licence scheme that allows us to reproduce statutes with the government's permission—without seeking a specific permission. However, this is a very tiny aspect of the Crown copyright.
I think that lots of countries can live without the equivalent of a Crown copyright. This is a system where they have reinforced Crown copyright in the U.K. I don't think we should follow that train. I think it makes sense, because they are government works, that they should belong to the public, because the government represents the public. I mean, the public is the fictional author of these works. I think it also creates problems with not only statutes, but also court documents and judgments. There are interesting cases of judges who copy the notes of their lawyers. There's been a case on that, which was really interesting.