Thank you for your question.
I believe the minister said this yesterday when he spoke. We, too, have said a number of times that, if it's possible to provide clarity in the bill, as parliamentarians, you will have the opportunity to make amendments.
The government stated yesterday that it would do that and provide some clarity. With respect to end-to-end encryption, for instance, not being able to introduce systemic vulnerabilities is precisely the issue, in our view. The legislation does not allow end-to-end encryption. It is clearly excluded. The government said it wanted to clarify that.
Quickly, something worth considering is that the bill really creates a framework to specify who the legislation applies to. For example, in the case of core providers, there is a process to follow. It's a transparent process. Consultations will take place. The regulations will have to respect certain criteria throughout. The same goes for ministerial orders; the matter will have to be discussed with electronic service providers first.
Putting everything in the bill wouldn't necessarily allow the act or regulations to keep pace with technology. That's why the bill is drafted the way it is. Considering how technology is adopted—