If time permits, I'll split my time with my colleague.
I'm following along the lines of Mr. Vincent and Mr. Marleau.
It's good to have you back here. I'm glad to hear that you're settling into the job. And I was really encouraged when I read your opening statement. You state that your priorities are set by statute, but that your mandate is to convince government institutions--these are noble terms, and I mean that, too; when I read this, I thought, this is good--to correct any instances of excessive secrecy without the need for recourse to the courts.
Then if I go down a little farther, you say, “I will not be an advocate for access requesters or an adversary of government”. I take that to mean that there must be a lot of frivolous cases. And I'm wondering--and I know some of my colleagues are going to ask you meatier questions themselves about the budget--whether a lot of the costs that we find in your office are related to frivolous cases. Can you weed those out and, as a result, speed up the process and even make it more efficient?
That's the only question I wanted to ask you.