The peace-bond provisions at the back end of the recognizance with conditions are the provisions I wonder about. The present bill doesn't enumerate the circumstances that can be imposed upon a person. There's no limit, necessarily, set in the statute.
If you look at the analogues in the U.K. and Australia, their legislation provides for what can be done to someone under a peace bond. One of the positions I took in front of the Senate on Bill S-3 was that it was actually worthy of Parliament to contemplate what can be done in Parliament's name, in essence, in imposing peace bonds, so that there would be a shared understanding of the outer limit. My personal view is that if it amounts to house arrest, it's unconstitutional.