There are breaches and there are breaches. Just last week, somebody e-mailed me and asked for somebody else's e-mail address, and I sent it to them. Technically I'm in violation of PIPEDA, but it's hardly a major infraction. It's something we all agree shouldn't have been personal information in the first place. I didn't really feel I was a felon.
There is going to be a lot of this type of thing on whether so-and-so got a piece of information he was entitled to. That might even be routine. I don't know what is achieved by disclosing that.
If you get into a major issue that might affect the public—and everybody remembers the personal banking information that got faxed to a junkyard in West Virginia—that is an egregious situation where disclosure might be justified, but I don't think it is a black and white thing. Employers have to live with millions of statutes. I mentioned some of them. I already mentioned the ones in the labour area. As you know, there are many other statutes in non-labour areas and there may be some situations—my colleagues, being lawyers, might know—where disclosure is required, but I don't think it's the normal practice.
My sense, in answer to your question, Mr. Laforest, would be this: is the public facing some harm? If there is some harm, the public should know there is a breach of the law that impacts them. Maybe there should be some public disclosure, but in routine breaches of the act, I wouldn't see any particular purpose being achieved by doing it.