I would not support that, for some of the reasons we had in the discussion and from the expert witness testimony.
We can't forget that theft is already illegal. What we're talking about is obtaining information by false pretense or by fraud. I think by throwing theft into the mix, just the idea of theft.... There are other examples; we only began to go down that road. But by throwing theft into the mix, it could possibly open up a whole can of worms that we haven't really had an opportunity to think out at this point.
So I wouldn't accept that subamendment to our government amendment. I can foresee where that could be problematic. We have to remember—and you raised the scenario where someone steals my wallet—that for the last hundred years, if someone steals your wallet, that would be a criminal offence.
Mr. Murphy thinks stealing someone's wallet is not an offence? I'd like to hear that explanation.