First of all, we have our own manuals, and there are some precedents. In addition, as we said initially in reply to Mr. Peterson's question, we have to listen to the reasons the departmental officials give for making the decision. Of course we will listen to their reasons and why they believe disclosing the information could be prejudicial.
If we do not think that disclosure is clearly prejudicial, we will explain our position. Then we will discuss the matter. The report viewed by the Commissioner will outline the department's position, the complainant's position and our own opinion. At that point, the Commissioner will have to make a decision, after analyzing the various views and after an independent investigation of all the positions has been conducted.
Clearly, many things happen in the course of an inquiry. So the department will see our point of view, and we will see theirs. It is possible that in the end only 20% of the document may not be disclosed, whereas initially, the department may have asked that over 50% of the document not be disclosed. If we do not support this decision, we will have to convince the Commissioner of our view, and he will have to go to the minister and tell him that the document will have to be released.