Thank you very much.
It's been helpful to have the officials. One thing I will say at the outset is that I feel like we need three hours with you. I don't say this in jest. This is a highly technical bill. We can't rush this. I have a list of about eight things I want to ask you about.
I'm looking up case law further to Madame DeBellefeuille's earlier point about the threshold of “reasonable grounds to suspect” versus “reasonable grounds to believe”. I haven't studied reasonable grounds to suspect in years. With regard to reasonable grounds to believe, I'm familiar with the Storrey decision that a person must subjectively believe that what they're doing is reasonable and that it must be objectively reasonable.
That probably means nothing to a lot of people, but these are difficult things to comprehend. When we're wrapping our heads around this, I think having you here for only one hour prior to clause-by-clause consideration is inadequate. I think we need you here a whole lot more, to be very candid. I'll leave that with you and with the chair and with my Liberal colleagues, because we have lots of questions, and I know I've just burned a minute here.
This is an important question that comes to the requirement for an electronic service provider to retain data for one year. Is that a de facto seizure that runs contrary to section 8? I understand that a search warrant is required, and that would be the search aspect. Normally there's the search and then the seizure. Is the compulsion to retain data a seizure in itself?