Thank you, sir.
In terms of the issue of what the judicial powers are based on CSIS, the service shall not take measures to reduce a threat, i.e., disrupt, if those measures will contravene the right or freedom guaranteed by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms or will be contrary to another Canadian law unless the service is authorized to take them by a warrant issued under proposed section 21.1.
In other words, what the legislation actually says is you can go ahead and do this disruption. CSIS can go ahead and do all of that, but if they decide it will breach the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, then they have to go see a judge. That's very different from what was put out there by the minister over the weekend, Minister Kenny, and if we're going to have proper oversight, if the public of Canada are going to understand this, if the parliamentarians are going to understand this, there has to be an opportunity for this to happen. I'll go back again to what people might think is my favourite newspaper, the establishment newspaper, The Globe and Mail, which talked about playing politics with the new anti-terrorism legislation when they said on the 23rd of February:
Two things are clear: First, the Conservatives think this bill will help them win an election, and second, they don't want people to understand it. That's a bad combination for a bill that will change things in secret, in ways we won't know for years.