Well, in the first place, I don't think it would be correct to automatically assume the termination and exemption provisions are contrary to public safety.
I think it's important to understand the context of policy development for this legislation. This was first tabled in December 2002 as Bill C-23. That was the result of direction from the then public safety minister to consult with all provinces and territories to come up with a consensus model for a sex offender registry.
The federal-provincial territorial high-risk offender working group of senior justice officials met over a lengthy period to review the existing frameworks for sex offender registries around the world to consider what the best policy choices and effective policies were for protecting Canadians through a sex offender registry. They did come up with a unanimous consensus. Included in that consensus were recommendations for the model that was tabled as Bill C-23. That passed, as all parties supported it in the House at the time, and all parties supported it in the Senate, so it became law.
There's been little or no suggestion that I've seen so far to date, other than today, that the termination and exemptions currently part of the scheme are somehow contrary to public safety. So my personal view is that it works very well.