Public Safety committee  I'll defer to my Justice colleague.

Public Safety committee  As mentioned, LIB-21 includes the provision to net out classified information. That would be clear in law. That's not as clear with NDP-21 or CPC-17. There would be no provision in law to net out classified information of the report. I would call that the main difference.

Public Safety committee  Well, yes, you would hope. Obviously, with NSIRA, the NSICOP, and so on, a lot of that was made to legislate that netting out of classified information. You would want some consistency there with public reporting in that regard.

Public Safety committee  Same issue as the last amendment. There's no direct provision in law to net out classified information.

Public Safety committee  It was post-tabling, maybe, as we changed the French side on the NSIRA act. You will recall there was a discussion on ”and” and et and mais, and it was changed to “et” and “et” so for consistency you may want to—

Public Safety committee  In terms of how busy, again, I just go back to the duties and functions. Again, clauses 13 to 20 of the proposed intelligence commissioner act go through all the decisions on reasonableness that the commissioner will be expected to make throughout the year. It's not at all clear

Public Safety committee  Again, as we went through with NSIRA, this is just a draft, and we do not quote the exact phrasing used in the CSIS Act in particular, which made it clear that the review bodies would have access to common law privileged information. It was left out. It was inadvertent. We don't

Public Safety committee  The intelligence commissioner is switching the role from review to more oversight, as making decisions on reasonableness. As my colleague said, the authorizations brought to the minister have an annual cycle, for the most part. You need to be careful of putting artificial deadli

Public Safety committee  I was just making the point that the National Defence Act has a 30-day time limit for the existing commissioner to respond to the authorizations of the CSE. That's pretty much the approach that was adopted for Bill C-59 for the intelligence commissioner. When you look at the duti

Public Safety committee  This part of the act was reported exactly from the National Defence Act that dealt with the office of the CSE commissioner, where 30 days was the limit, or “as practical” is the wording. For the most part, the intelligence commissioner will be looking at authorizations that are o

Public Safety committee  No, none at all. I guess if the commissioner did not feel that he or she had the right information or needed more information, they would just reject the authorization and send it back to the minister with reasons. Given that, the minister could make a new decision in light of th

Public Safety committee  The act is specific. If the intelligence commissioner rejects the decision, he or she will give the reasons why so the minister will know why it was rejected and have the opportunity to resubmit. Perhaps the other issue with the drafting here is that there's no flexibility, in t

Public Safety committee  The amendment would not be in line with the mandate of the intelligence commissioner. The mandate of the intelligence commissioner is really to make determinations on reasonableness of ministerial authorizations, and not about review, looking at lawfulness, relative ministerial d

Public Safety committee  Fundamentally, yes.

Public Safety committee  Yes.