I hear what you're saying. National embarrassment isn't in that, so I would concur with you on that.
There seems to be a pattern emerging. Certainly, with Mr. Esau, there were some concerns about his case. I'm going to turn to that in a second.
I have in my hand the annual report of the Information Commissioner. As you said in your report, you rely on officers of Parliament, like the Information Commissioner. It depends on whether you're looking at the glass as half empty or half full--mine is at about a third. I guess I look at the report card, and we have some problems. We have to acknowledge them--not exacerbate them, but acknowledge them--and get moving on them.
I look at this report and I see that we have some frequent flyers here. We have the Department of Justice, we have the RCMP, we have PCO, and we have DFAIT--they've gone up from an F to a D, but in my house that wouldn't be acceptable. As a former teacher, I'd be wanting to do some remediation with that student.
I guess I want to know your response to this report. And I know you just got this. How can we do better to clarify this issue of exemptions? I know that with Mr. Esau and others there's a lot of frustration. There seems to be a lot of “guess what I'm thinking” going on. I'm just curious as to your response, as a policy developer--not you personally--in terms of where you're going with this report. What is the response to date?