Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Continuing on that line, we heard some testimony in the week prior to the break with respect to this very question. What we heard fairly clearly, I thought, from those who were giving testimony is that it's perfectly within the confines of the Privacy Act for ministers and people within the department to know the name of the requester--provided under subsection 8(2). That's the section that comes to mind as the section that enables that. There are some ten categories that allow that purview. It speaks to the earlier point that I raised in relation to Mr. Martin's point, that just because it's allowed doesn't necessarily mean it happens.
The same question came to mind as at least of couple of you spoke in your testimony about different instances of coming across information suggesting you've learned that somehow someone in the department knew that the name of the requester was there. That very fact doesn't necessarily mean that anything was out of sorts. It could very well be within the context of the Privacy Act that this information was known. It gives me pause to wonder why one would conclude that it would be anything different from that.
We've also heard, certainly through your testimony today, some suggestions about how things should change with the Access to Information Act, and that's all well and good. We're concerned today with coming to understand better how this process of the names of the requesters is being handled within the departments. That's the context of our discussion today.
On this question of the minister knowing the name, how many of those instances that you mentioned might well be quite legitimate under the Privacy Act, which exists today?