Thank you for your question. I'll try my best. I want to be very candid and blunt.
We appreciate what has been brought forward in Bill C-12. I see it as four operational domains: border security, transnational organized crime disruption, illicit financial intelligence and the immigration system facilitating more rapid information sharing.
To your question related to the OACP, what is in Bill C-2 is absolutely critical to us in terms of lawful intercept. I agree with what was said. It is not a request for any more of an invasion of privacy. It is only a request for a modern legislative regime and amendments that are relevant to the modernization of how society communicates so that when we acquire the highest level of judicial authorization for an investigation in relation to any of the areas you touched on, which are all critical to public safety, we can effectively do it.
To be quite honest, the way we do it now—and I'm estimating—in a gross majority of the cases, it would be like having English-speaking people monitoring communication in a foreign language. The encryption that occurs results in the fact that we can neither make sense of nor exploit the communication we have acquired. The alterations in Bill C-2 would be much more effective in providing us this key investigative technique that we already had.
The other mechanism is that to acquire it for a single use would be worthless and wasteful. We have to ensure that the Canada Evidence Act is altered so that we have the technique which we previously had, that it's conducive to modern communication, and that it can be protected in terms of the investigative technique and the technology utilized to employ that technique.