Mr. MacKenzie, you make a very valid point. These two provisions.... As much as I would be pleased on behalf of this particular government to take credit for all the tough-on-crime legislation—all that we have done to protect victims and law-abiding Canadians—these provisions were actually put in by the previous government in 2001 in response to the 9/11 crisis that the world faced. There were sunsetting provisions, as you know, put into the legislation, but these provisions were put in by the previous government.
We have modified them; we have put more safeguards, more oversight in. I make no apology for that. But the actual provisions themselves—the recognizance with convictions and the investigative hearings—were something that the government determined back almost a decade ago that they had to have; they determined that police officers had to have these provisions.
I guess I'm trying to preach to the group of individuals who enacted these provisions. Surprises never cease on this, but this is where these provisions came from. As much as I would like to take credit for everything that is done and let our government take credit for everything that is done to modernize our laws with respect to helping victims, these two provisions actually were drafted by the previous government—albeit that we have put some additional safeguards and oversight in place, and again I make no apology for that.