I'll take that question.
I think my colleague touched on that and highlighted that there are all sorts of Criminal Code provisions that use the reasonable grounds to suspect standard. In this case, what you're looking at in terms of the subscriber information is essentially a name and an address. On the balance of that type of information with the privacy concerns, reasonable grounds to suspect was chosen as the appropriate standard.
Just to speak to your point about Spencer, what the decision said was that it was critical that there be lawful authorization, so since 2014, police have been calling for lawful authorization. That's what Bill C-22 does. It provides lawful authorization.