I'm not going to disagree with what Mr. Norlock said. I think what the amendment does is to bring more precision to the definition and the way information sharing is handled. There is a concern that with the broadening of information, some individual may get caught in the loop based on wrong information. If that information is shared—and it doesn't just relate to cases like Arar, which I'm quite familiar with—with the Canada Revenue Agency or whoever, the individual's reputation or credit rating could be undermined or destroyed.
All this amendment is asking for is the various governments, departments, and agencies to be absolutely sure that the information they are sharing is accurate and complete. I think that's a greater protection to society. I'll be supporting this amendment.