Well, you'll be familiar with the O'Connor report from a few years ago that looked at the situation of Maher Arar. That report made a number of recommendations about how consular information should be safeguarded. It also helped us to determine how we could, on an individual basis, decide when the public interest outweighed the interest of protecting someone's privacy.
What we had to add to the equation is a process that brought together the experts: privacy experts, people who understand the legislation and the commitments under the Privacy Act; the Department of Justice legal advisers, who could help us to look at how you apply those tests to an individual case; and then the consular officers. Having a formal process enables us to determine how the public interest in a particular case outweighs the privacy obligations we have toward an individual. Those are processes we've set up since that commission.
As explained as well, with the RCMP, we found that sometimes they were not asking us for information in a consistent way, or in a way that enabled us to apply the public interest test. That was a conversation that has been taking place with the RCMP. We're in the process of setting up better terms to help us do exactly what you've been talking about, and that is to provide more consistency in the way in which that public interest test is applied.