I think one of the big concerns around this one, and why it was so contentious, was that this was the foundation of the bill for the senator, in that the victim would have access to see where their attacker was.
My question to you, again through the legal world, is whether that would happen.
The other thing I can't reconcile here is that if it's covered in Bill C-233, why wouldn't it just be put in Bill S-205? I don't understand why you wouldn't do that for consistency.
There are two questions there. Number one, would the victim still be able to monitor and have that choice to monitor if this is removed? Number two, if it's already in Bill C-233, wouldn't it be more consistent to keep it in Bill S-205?
I apologize that you guys went to legal school and I did not.