First and easiest is the crafting of a reasonable law to allow us to access basic subscriber information on a timely basis where there is limited or no reasonable expectation of privacy. That was R. v. Spencer.
The second one is the resolution passed by the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police that would compel the production of a password or a pass phrase to unlock the device or the data held by somebody who is charged with an offence. That would be issued under judicial authorization. It's not a police tool. It would be the judge who would order the unlocking of that device to gain access to the data—the evidence.
On data retention, we need some form of regulation that requires our telecommunication services providers to retain, for maybe two years, the key metadata that would allow us to track a transmission under lawful authority.
Lastly, in an uncomplicated fashion, maybe some re-crafting of the MLAT process, that a warrant issued lawfully under a judge in one entrusted country—the Five Eyes, for example—be equally valid in another, if backed by the jurisdiction in which it would be served.