I just get cut off.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I thank all three of you for being here.
I have a few questions on some of the language that is in, or not in, the legislation. I'll just throw them out there and ask for a response from both you, Senator, and our friends from the Canadian Civil Liberties Association.
The first is the absence of the term “least restrictive” that was in Bill C-56, which was also flawed legislation, but that's not what we're here to discuss.
The other piece of language that I wanted to hear from all three of you about is in proposed paragraph 32(a), which talks about “for security or other reasons”. That's something that I've asked multiple witnesses about because I have a concern that it continues the status quo of using this type of confinement to compensate for other systemic issues in our corrections system.
Can I hear all three of you—or both of you, however you divvy it up—on both of those two language issues in the legislation?