In my written submission that you will be receiving, I do discuss this a little bit, and I'll provide you more information about it.
The argument in favour of a tribunal is that you take the judicial function away from the Privacy Commissioner and the Privacy Commissioner maintains the ombudsman's role. You can also give it to a group of experts on the subject. This is the way the system works in the United Kingdom, and I'll give you information about how the British system works under the Information Commissioner and their Information Tribunal.
I think the Canadian Bar Association has come out in favour of such a model that is based on the Canadian Human Rights Commission and the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal. I'm not an expert on that, but I understand that it has led to delays. The perception is that it's just one other step on the way to a court, and I certainly wouldn't be in favour of establishing such a tribunal if it were of that nature. I am aware that there are arguments in the literature in favour of tribunals and that there may be a way one can be constructed in this situation, which would avoid the problems that the Canadian human rights area has. But at the moment, my preference would be some quite specific order-making powers for the Privacy Commissioner, and then an appeal to the Federal Court directly.