Thank you for your candour. That was a fairly complex answer to a foggy question.
I applaud the determination to catch these predators before they do their harm, but what I see here is the statutory construction of a trap. I've avoided the use of the word “entrapment” because entrapment is actually a defence, but is what we've constructed a statutory trap? Everyone around the table would agree that it has been designed for a particular purpose, but I'm asking you if the department has actually turned its mind to whether or not this trap might trap other fish if it is put in the wrong hands and used in bad faith. If the police can't get the guy on bank robbery, they could set him up under this one. They're going to set the guy up and they're going to get him one way or another.
This is a statutory trap, and I actually don't see another one like it in the whole Criminal Code. Maybe it's a pity we can't do it for bank robberies, murders, and all the other conspiracy offences and catch the guys before they do it, but this is a statutory trap, and I'm only asking for some reassurance from the department or the government that they've looked at this trap and that it's not going to be abused to trap otherwise innocent citizens.