I may answer the previous question on the link between the standards of evidence and the risk for ordinary Canadians.
Take people who travel abroad, for example.
In that case, does all the information on every traveller need to be sent to CSIS so that it can identify threats to national security—this involves a standard of relevance—or should we instead provide only the information required by CSIS to carry out its work?
Is there a threat?
We're currently looking at how Bill C-51 was implemented. We've noted that it was used about 50 times last year. We're continuing our review.
Does that mean it has been overused?
Probably not, but it's too early to say. I think the standards of evidence, which allow for information sharing, create a significant potential risk for innocent people, for ordinary citizens who shouldn't be studied by CSIS.
How can we try to find legal tools that would enable the government to protect the population without compromising the freedoms and privacy of ordinary citizens?
I think that's a very important issue for you.