This is very similar to the Green Party's amendment earlier which amended a different section. We found what we thought would be a better place for it. We felt there should be an express commitment to protecting the identity of a human source given in advance of providing the information.
We have this protection which allows CSIS to sort of go out and offer a blanket protection to everybody who tells them anything, instead of what I think is the intention and actually the practice, which is to say that in pieces of important and significant information where there's a threat to someone, you offer that protection. That is what this says, that you would make an express commitment, not necessarily written, but in advance of receiving the information. That's what the sources are looking for in order to cooperate with CSIS, rather than a kind of broad “everybody who tells us anything gets protected”, which I think the courts will find difficult to deal with if the legislation is left as it is. This actually protects the integrity of the process by saying that there will be an express commitment in advance of the information having been given.