My colleague the assistant commissioner thinks that perhaps the reason for the discrepancy in the notes is that it was a spokesperson from the ministry of justice who said the power was implied.
It's one of these difficult questions. You think you should be informing the public in a more timely, up-to-date, modern way, but your act doesn't specifically say it. Honestly, I'm a bit torn between what I should be doing and not straying beyond the bounds of my mandate. The fact is I don't have particular financing for it. I think I should inform Canadians of challenges with their personal information--for example, the RCMP exempt banks--but the audit took money, the special report to Parliament took money, and so on. That's an example.
It would be to enhance the kind of public education activities that I already do under PIPEDA, but on the side that involves the personal information that Canadians give to the federal government.