This legislation is consistent with measures that are in place with our Five Eyes partners. As I've said, the Five Eyes public safety ministers had a virtual meeting this week. This is always a sort of standing item—what we can do to deal with threats in the cybersecurity domain. The nature and the evolving threat landscape is such that I would suggest one country alone won't be able to have all of the good ideas and all of the best practices. That's why, as François-Philippe said...the ability to work with G7 countries, particularly in the security context with our Five Eyes partners.... MI5 and MI6 in the U.K. have done a lot of research in this area.
One thing that obviously our American allies worry about is the rise of disinformation. They're in an election year. There's the chance that malicious state actors can either encrypt or paralyze cyber-systems in the United States and insert disinformation and malware. The very basic tenets of a democracy are reliant, as François-Philippe said, on a series of private sector and government actors in the basic transmission of information.
In our perspective, the Government of Canada thinks the adoption of this legislation will put us in a similar position to our five allies. If we're not able to, in this Parliament, adopt this legislation, I think it would conversely send a signal to our allies—particularly to the United States. I refer to that, because the interconnectedness of our economies and industries, which my colleague knows better than I do, means that basic services to Canadians, which we rely on for daily life, would be, in our view, subject to a threat that can be mitigated and can be contained.