I'll preface that by saying the law enforcement justification was the subject of a fair bit of controversy when it was enacted, and there has been a fair bit of press commentary on it since. In general, since that time, it is not something that has received a lot of complaint or attention. The regime itself overall seems to be working well. It hasn't been the subject of a lot of controversy since it was introduced.
That being said, aside from our provincial counterparts, there are still those who take a fundamental objection to it, and those objections are along the lines that I outlined in my opening remarks. As far as I know, those people who have those opinions, who feel that it's fundamentally contrary to Canadian legal tradition—that it puts police officers above the law—still have those views. Fairly recently, the CBA took a position in front of our parliamentary committee calling for the repeal of the law enforcement justification, and you may be hearing from them as witnesses. There are people who are still against these as a matter of principle.
Turning to your question about provincial views, I don't want to put words in their mouths or words in the mouths of the police. I will say just generally that the regime is detailed. It has a number of detailed requirements in order for it to apply, and there have been some general concerns voiced about whether it is excessively detailed and excessively difficult for law enforcement officers to fall under this regime.