Thank you, Chair.
This speaks to an amendment that Monsieur Pratte brought to the Senate after hearing testimony from the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police. It adds to that. Considering that the compromise was already acceptable, it once again, as far as I'm concerned, goes too far in the direction of leaving loopholes open for police. In this case, when it is related to other offences that a journalist may have committed, there was a concern raised by the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police related, for example, to someone who might have outstanding charges from driving under the influence or something of that nature that is completely unrelated to the source, but the ongoing criminal investigation into that journalist on this other matter could be seen as a way to find a source. The bill was originally drafted in a way that completely isolated the two proceedings, which the police did not like and, rightfully so, Monsieur Pratte had already found a compromise. I don't feel that going further in this direction is necessary.