Professor, thank you for that. I take your position on that, but perhaps you could respond to the question specifically. I understand your view that the Shawcross doctrine is insufficient and that there could be a more rigorous standard. For example, however, Andrew Roman, a lawyer from Toronto, states:
If the Attorney General asks for advice, a Prime Minister can respond. But offering unsolicited “advice” in secret about a particular, ongoing case is an intrusion.
Would you agree with that?