These measures were enacted to meet the challenges that the world faced in the early part of the 2000s. As you know, these were looked at and a number of people came forward in 2007. You might want to have a look at this. It was proposed by the government at the time that we would continue. We had a look at them ourselves and we had discussions, as I do when I go across this country. I always meet with law enforcement agencies, I meet with attorneys general, I meet with people who are concerned about terrorism or crime in this country.
What we have done is strike that balance that you mentioned in your question to me. You'll see the safeguards are there throughout. There are more safeguards with respect to this provision than there are to ordinary criminal law provisions, quite frankly. You can be charged under the Criminal Code, and the consent of the federal attorney general or the provincial attorney general or the agents of the attorney general isn't needed. Here you need that consent, so this is an added protection over and above what might normally be considered.
So have we struck the right balance? Yes, I believe we have, and I think your investigation will confirm that. I've pointed out half a dozen of them to you, and when you have a look at the legislation, I think you'll come to the same conclusion that I and my colleagues have, which is that this is very reasonable and these tools are good to have.
The fact that they're not necessary does not dissuade me that these are important tools. If we were the subject of a terrorist attack that could have been prevented had tools like these been there, we would be subject to criticism, as you can imagine, and the horror of the Canadian public, saying that every step has to be taken to prevent such things.
I'm very interested in changes to our laws that help prevent tragedy and crime. You perhaps had a look at the provisions with respect to protecting children. The two new offences we put in there were designed to break up any kind of activity before the child gets molested, in terms of two adults conspiring with each other or if the individual gives sexually explicit material to a child. Again, people ask, “Why is this necessary?” Well, we want to stop the activity before the child is actually abused. This is in that same line. We want to have the tools in place to break up and investigate possible terrorist activity before it actually happens.
Again, I think these measures are very reasonable. They were reasonable 10 years ago when the then government introduced them, and this is our fourth attempt, as you may know, Mr. Chair, to introduce them. I think these are important tools to have, and with respect to the balance you indicated, I outlined half a dozen in my initial comments to you. I think your analysis and study of this will confirm that.