Justice committee  I think I have very little to add to those two previous answers. I endorse the notion that the increase in the statistics may be an increase in detection of a pre-existing problem. The logic of increasing may be as was suggested by Mr. Casey, but it may equally also be that the first increases weren't enough to have the desired deterrent effect and we need to actually redouble our efforts.

Justice committee  I will say this about the consecutive versus concurrent dilemma. For example, when we're talking about multiple child victims, I think it's appropriate for Parliament to send a strong message that there should be consecutive sentences, because it sends a strong message that every child matters and that one child's victimization is going to add to the punishment just as much as another child's victimization.

Justice committee  Yes. Thank you very much for your kind comments. To get directly to the answers, in terms of the travel tightening, KINSA supports it. In addition to work with KINSA, I spent five years on the board of ECPAT, which is based out of Thailand and is the largest NGO dealing with the commercial sexual exploitation of children.

Justice committee  Okay. On the publicly available registry, complaints about release of private information, the way I read the bill—correct me if I'm reading it wrong—is information that the police, in the exercise of their discretion on the ground, have already decided is so important it needs to be released, so this is not making public.

Justice committee  Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, for the opportunity to address this committee. I'm legal counsel to the Kids' Internet Safety Alliance, which is a Canadian-based charity that operates globally to rescue children from sexual exploitation on the Internet. We recently expanded into the cyberbullying space as well.

Justice committee  I agree with you. That's why I say you've got the right balance. You have legislated effectively in this area, and part of legislating effectively, as my colleagues from the CBA have said, is that in seven out of eight of the new powers you've legislated judicial oversight. You have told the police that you would give them those powers, but would not give them without a leash.

Justice committee  Yes.

Justice committee  I think it is wise and, indeed, necessary to stick with that narrow definition that the police chiefs have been presenting to you. I think it needs to be very clear if this comes to be interpreted by the courts that it is that narrow approach; it is not broader metadata that gives patterns.

Justice committee  In terms of reasonable suspicion for transmission data, it may or may not be totally revealing. There are a lot of examples where it will not be in an individual sense, that is, receiving one hateful bullying e-mail, for example. You need the transmission data to know who you're investigating.

Justice committee  Again, there have been hundreds of pages written by higher courts on what recklessness means, but at the risk of oversimplifying it, it's more than just carelessness. If I carelessly bump into Mr. Gilhooly, next to me, I may not even realize that he's there, but I should have realized.

Justice committee  I don't believe you would be if there's no surrounding collateral information that puts you on notice. If it comes from a group of your friends and you happen to know that your friend just broke up with the person depicted in the image, and it comes all by itself with no.... This is an image being distributed without the person's consent—no tags on it, it just comes—but you happen to know that person just broke up with a friend of yours.

Justice committee  It's a very good question that I had not turned my mind to before you asked it. I think that based on my experience these Internet child exploitation investigations are complicated. We do a lot of training of police officers and it's important that people who are using these tools be appropriately trained.

Justice committee  I'd like to cast the question a little bit differently. I think this bill is a win-win because it has extensive judicial oversight that minimizes and regulates intrusiveness of the police. The very narrow area in which Internet service subscribers can voluntarily turn over will be defined by the courts.

Justice committee  The courts are very much alive as to what you can turn over voluntarily, and all the rest requires prior judicial authorization, so I think that's a win-win. I don't think it's a tie and you pick a winner. I think that our privacy has robust protections in this bill, all of which are supervised by the court, and of course the provisions that enable law enforcement to move more effectively address those very serious criminal misconduct issues that you've identified.

Justice committee  No.