With all due respect for Mr. Comartin, it seems to me the proposed amendment is problematic. Please correct me if I am wrong, but it seems to me that the clause, as currently worded, is more comprehensive than the proposed amendment. The part where it says: “[...] knowing that or being reckless as to whether the information will be used to commit an indictable offence that includes fraud, deceit or falsehood” seems to me to be clearer than “or false [...] or knowing that there is a substantial or unjustified risk that the information will be used to do so.” The word “substantial”, in relation to risk is vague, and the word “unjustified” is even more vague.
In my opinion, the proposed amendment is more vague than what currently appears in the French version of the bill under this clause.