Hon. Frances Lankin: Senator Housakos, will you take a question? Thank you very much. First of all, thank you for your effort on this and for the remarks that you have delivered today. I have two questions.

The first is with respect to the Broadcasting Act. You taught me something today in terms of the challenges that exist, which you alluded to. You talked about a more straightforward way of administering the intent of the amendment to the Broadcasting Act than the workarounds that have to be done now. I just wonder if you can provide me with a little more information on what the current situation is.

My second question is more of a comment, to say that I appreciate the sensitivity with which you described the discretion allowed to ministers, whether it’s a matter of foreign relations and a Global Affairs Canada, or GAC, or government consideration about what steps might harm those relations and why those relations are important as an executive branch decision. I’m also going to ask you, with your legal background, about the challenge of intelligence to evidence. Do the processes inherent in these amendments allow for the decision makers to have full information? Considering the reasons why intelligence is not made public — protection of sources, statecraft, other sorts of things — how do we get around those sensitivities and the fact that many parliamentarians have, of late, insisted on full transparency without giving any sensitive consideration to those matters that you raised in your speech?

Hon. Frances Lankin: Senator Patterson, will you take a question?

Senator D. Patterson: Yes.