Thank you, Mr. Chair.
The minister said we had robust oversight for security agencies. I want to put on the record, Mr. Chair, that I sincerely disagree. The fact is that we're the only one of the so-called Five Eyes that does not have parliamentary oversight for security agencies. I think the government, if it were thinking about bringing in a balance, would bring in such a body. In a report from 2005 all parties agreed on such a body. I'd just make that point. As Ms. Girard said, related to the revocation of citizenship, Canada is alone compared to other democratic countries when it comes to that issue. We're also alone on parliamentary oversight when it comes to the Five Eyes.
I think probably the nub of the issue, in terms of this bill, is the substantive changes to CSIS on its extraterritorial activities, if I could call it that. The deputy or head of CSIS can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think originally when CSIS came in it was envisioned that we'd depend on our foreign relations or liaison relations with other countries to provide us information, and that's how we'd operate, rather than having agents abroad. In today's reality the world has changed. We're dealing with a stateless world to some regard.
Doesn't this bill, in terms of CSIS, now give wide extraterritorial applications for Canadian judicial decisions abroad in how we operate?
Do you understand what I asked?