Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
I would like to thank the witnesses for being here today. It is extremely important to have you here so that we can better understand the intricacies of Bill C-51.
Perhaps I misunderstood some of the distinctions that you made. I reread the definition that is being used by the Canadian Security Intelligence Service. I do not see why the 17 federal institutions affected by Bill C-51 could not use this definition, which seems to include a lot of things. The definition includes espionage, sabotage, foreign-influenced activities, activities that promote the use of violence, and so on. The definition that CSIS is currently using already includes a lot of things.
First, why could the 17 federal institutions affected by Bill C-51 not use that definition? What would that change?
Second, if I understood correctly, CSIS is one of the 17 institutions that will be affected by the definition set out in Bill C-51. In a way, the bill would not change the definition used by CSIS. Is that correct?