France has been answering the same question in the same way. If you go back to the intent of proposed section 5.392, it talks about information gathered under SMS, and that is non-critical information in terms of a major incident or an accident. It is critical information to prevent an incident or an accident. If it's reportable, it can't be protected because it didn't come through the process. This is information gathered through the reporting system, demanded by the SMS. If it's a reportable incident, it's in the public domain and it's handled differently. If it's an accident, it's in the public domain. It's handled differently--the coroner's involved, the safety board's involved. They have all the powers in the world. This is the basic information on hazards that's being protected.
Proposed section 5.392 says “collected under this process”--in other words, the SMS process--not collected by Nav Canada under the CADORS process, not collected by the safety board through their accident investigations. This is the basis of the SMS. It's the small things that are prevented from growing. If that information comes into our hands by one means or another in the department, we want it to be protected, because it goes right back to the individual who reported the minor infraction, the minor error, the non-mandatory reportable incident, which will come to light as it does today. If we don't give them some sort of protection, as France has said many times, we will choke off a source of valuable data to improve the safety performance in this country.