You heard the minister say earlier that he was talking about this bill and the provisions, in particular, being consistent with 200 years of history in terms of law. I think that's what he said—“being consistent”—yet previously, witnesses—and lawyers, I might add—have indicated that these two provisions we're talking about in particular today are a substantial departure from Canadian legal traditions. I don't expect you to say why they have said that. I'm not going to ask you that, because you probably don't know why they said it, but I wonder if you personally think that having these two kinds of provisions in there is a change in Canadian legal traditions.
On November 19th, 2012. See this statement in context.