I agree with what Mr. Fogel said. I think the issue is not so much stronger security powers, but smarter security powers. I think the review process contributes to this, but I would also say that the ongoing “intelligence to evidence” consultation that the government is conducting is very important. Professor Forcese and I have commented that Canada seems to lag behind our allies, even on a per capita basis, in being able to conduct terrorism prosecutions. There have been improvements, but I think there can still be improvements.
Now, I come back to SCISA. I don't think we make Canadians safer by having the broadest possible definition of security threats in SCISA. In fact, I think that not only threatens rights by making potentially environmental groups, indigenous groups, and diaspora groups the target of security information sharing, but we make Canadians less safe by potentially drowning departments with information.
I would say the threat of terrorism is real. We've never denied it. It is going to be here for the foreseeable future and we have to be smarter about the way we respond to and target these threats and not simply attempt to reassure the public by enacting legislation that is as broad or as tough as possible.