Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I want to pick up on what Mr. Housefather was talking about. I wasn't planning on going into this, but he makes a very good point.
If I understand his point correctly, and maybe I don't, what I understand is a general concern. Who says “substantial likelihood” or whatever it is? What about a “possibility” or “plausibility”? If I could make one suggestion or one thought, it's that business hates uncertainty. The uncertainty in this bill is what's driving business to come out so clearly.... Even if it's a possibility, then what a business.... If I'm a business owner or if I'm advising shareholders or whatever and I have uncertainty, and it's “possibility” and they say, “Well, the recourse is that you have judicial review”, well, somebody might disagree with you.
What I want to underscore to the officials is that uncertainty is so pronounced here. When you are advising the government, please recognize that. Even with metadata, we don't know what classes of metadata will be preserved for up to a year. A point that's been made here is that we don't need to preserve anything for a full year. Which is it? I get that you want to put it in regulation and I get that it changes, but the act is silent on those things.
I'll open it up for comments, and then I have a question on what I had to say. Does anybody have any comments on that?