Yes, Mr. Chair, I'd like to move that.
In many ways, expanding on the dialogue that we just had with respect to clause 8, my amendment would be responsive to some of the evidence that has been cited by my colleagues on the opposition side.
What I propose is that we begin by amending clause 8, replacing lines 11 and 12 on page 4, for those who wish to read along, with the following language:
[re]lates to national security or intelligence, unless the activity is an ongoing activity and the appropriate Minister determines that the review would
be injurious to national security.
The next part of my amendment would add, after line 16 on page 4, the following: a new subsection, which would become subsection 8(2). It would read as follows:
If the appropriate Minister determines that a review would be injurious to national security, he or she must inform the Committee of his or her determination and the reasons for it.
It would also create a new subsection 8(3), which would read as follows.
If the appropriate Minister determines that the review would no longer be injurious to national security or if the appropriate Minister is informed that the activity is no longer ongoing, he or she must inform the Committee that the review may be conducted.
There would be a concurrent amendment, which will likely come up later in the day, under clause 31.
Mr. Chair, I'm in your hands as to whether I should wait to advocate for that at the appropriate time or whether we should just leave it to my moving the amendments under clause 8.