My conclusion can be quite substantive as well. I will make sure it's exactly as long as it needs to be.
I appreciate your input, Mr. Gilkes, and yours, Ms. Gibner, and yours, Mr. Wong, because I genuinely was not entirely sure how the subamendment interacted with the Privacy Commissioner's recommendation. As I said, I unfortunately didn't have a chance to have this discussion with Mr. Housefather personally, but I appreciate him bringing forward a subamendment that, at least in my view now, does seek to get a bit more of a middle ground from where the bill started—all subscriber information related to anything—to what the Privacy Commissioner suggested, which may go too far in the other direction in terms of tying the hands of the judge or justice who's issuing the production order.
I forget which member mentioned it before, but contrary to what was said, I was not entirely prepared to vote for the subamendment at the beginning of this. I'm probably more comfortable now, based on my exchanges with our officials.
I will also say, and it bears repeating—I know that my colleagues across the way want to hear this again—that it would have been helpful, and perhaps could have saved time and resources, if we had been able to have the Privacy Commissioner here to explain some of the reasoning and to help us understand the rationale for the proposal they made in recommendation number three.