My recollection is the courts found that to be lawful. What we're talking about is not just those particular examples, because data matching can be used for any number of purposes, both in the law enforcement context or immigration enforcement, and in other contexts as well.
We're saying there needs to be some significant thought given to it, because it might simply be a matter of convenience of wanting to match this information, because information is extremely useful. Revenue Canada, the Government of Canada, runs on information, there's no doubt about that.
But when information becomes centralized, it becomes more potent in the sense that it is potentially more dangerous to the privacy interests of individuals. It's potentially more dangerous if that information is leaked. One would probably recall a number of years ago Human Resources Development Canada launched LLFF database that took employment insurance information and income tax information, information from a number of sources. So it had individuals' histories, employment histories, going back from beginning to end, all in one database. It was seen as being lawful, but politically problematic to such an extent that it had to be dismantled because there were very strong feelings that it was not appropriate.
So what we're talking about is not saying that this is okay and that's not; it's making sure there's a framework in place to make sure those important questions are asked at the time.