And thank you to the witnesses.
My question for both representatives of commissioners here today is really more about when the breach actually occurs. I think I heard in Mr. Leadbeater's presentation that this information could be shared within government circles except, I think you mentioned, for exempt staff, which would include ministerial political staff, for lack of a better word. But would it be true to say that it's when that information is used in a fashion that would in some way prejudice the process, or complicate the process going forward, that the breach in fact occurs? I've just been trying to draw a line on that.
For example, I note a potential example of this from the Information Commissioner's report of 1998-99. I'll quote from page 8 of the report:
The Prime Minister's department set a poor example by insisting from the beginning that the access system be sufficiently slow to enable PCO to continue to manage releases in a way most favourable to the government of the day. All politically sensitive requests require consultation with PCO before they are answered.
Is that an example of the “retribution--I think that is the term you used--or an example of when the mechanics of a request begin to have consequences, because of the sharing of that information? I wonder if you could expand on that a bit.