I have just a clarification, Mr. Chair.
There are two situations where the Canadian has committed the offence abroad. There is of course the situation where the person is coming back under the International Transfer of Offenders Act. In those situations, the scheme is that the Minister of Public Safety, who is responsible for the administration of that act, is the authority under law to make the decision about whether the offence is equivalent or not. So the Minister of Public Safety makes that determination in an international transfer case.
Where the situation is a Canadian returning free and clear, if I can put it that way, not under any sentence but simply arriving back in Canada from a trip abroad or living abroad, this scheme provides that where there is information brought to the attention of authorities that they did commit a sex offence abroad, the attorney general or minister of justice in a territory can serve them, because they're the people who do administer that part of the registration process.
The way it's structured here is to say, in those situations, therefore the relevant or appropriate minister would be the decision-maker about equivalency of the offence simply because they're the decision-maker who's serving the person with this notice. That's why it has been structured that way.
There's also provision in Bill C-34, a little further on, that if the offender feels it is not an equivalent offence after the order has been made, they can apply for an exemption order on that basis. That is further along in clause 18.