Mr. Leadbeater, time is up for that.
This is the place where the NDP would normally have a question, and if you don't mind, I'm going to sneak in a brief one.
All of us want to know how widespread this practice may or may not be. I don't think you are the right witnesses to answer that question. We're going to be calling other witnesses who I hope can tell us what the common practice is in their workplaces.
You've already said you only hear about complaints that come forward. There's probably a reluctance to bring forward complaints. If fear of retribution is one of the aspects of having your name revealed, you're going to compound that concern by being the one who blows the whistle on the practice and files a formal complaint. I think it's common sense that you're not hearing of grievers that frequently.
I'd like to flesh out a little of what Mr. Owen started, the conversation about amber lighting or triage or initial adjudication that may treat one complaint differently from another. The survey you just mentioned, Mr. Leadbeater, will be of some use, but can we say with any degree of certainty that it is common practice to give an initial adjudication to a complaint that will either make it go more quickly through the system or more slowly through the system? Would you see that practice as being contrary to the intent, which is equal access to information for all applicants?