I'm not speaking about criminalizing anyone, per se. I'm saying there are inconsistencies in the mechanism you have produced as a private member's bill. Certainly the goal is laudable, but the inconsistencies that this is creating, even within the code itself, to me, do not necessarily add to that clarity.
Earlier in your testimony you mentioned that this bill gives new tools to those in law enforcement. I would just challenge that simply, for example, by saying that we have before the house Bill C-55, which gives tools to law enforcement in extenuating circumstances, where someone is about to commit a crime that would cause significant harm to public safety, or perhaps someone is suicidal and is about to hurt themselves. Law enforcement can then access that. I certainly hope you'll be supporting that legislation, because that will actually give law enforcement tools they need in order to maintain public safety and to save lives.
Lastly, I would just ask for your response, because you've given the impression, at least in my view, that this would help law enforcement deal with ISPs. You mentioned the Amanda Todd case, which was very tragic. I would like your response on the ISP provisions, because I don't see anything in here that would actually help with that.