The articulation in the subamendment keeps the same structure of the production order, makes reference to the definition, but makes it clear that there's discretion of the judge to order appropriate subscriber information for the application.
As you mentioned before, the bill version lends itself to the interpretation that the judge has no discretion and must order all subscriber information in their possession or control.
The issue with the BQ-4 is that the practice is—the RCMP can speak to this—not only do they bring their affidavit, but they also bring a draft production order. The way it is articulated, it would look like the police would have to actually specify the exact subscriber information they're looking for prior to knowing what they need. As Sergeant Gilkes has expressed before, this can be served on a variety of service providers, and police might not know that, so the classes of information would be more helpful to them.