Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you very much, Mr. McKay, for being here today. Again, on behalf of the committee members who did go to Washington, thank you again for the opportunity to visit your location in Washington and, certainly, to learn more about what the organization is doing.
When we visited and learned about what the challenges are around privacy in the U.S. as well, I think what we took back is that there isn't as robust a regime in the United States currently as there is in Canada, even though part of what we're doing here as a committee is reviewing our privacy protection, .obviously, and making sure that we're up to date with how fast the world is evolving over the Internet and through social media.
I know that at Google Canada in particular you've had I believe a fairly positive working relationship with our Privacy Commissioner. I know that we've been wrestling with her role and the role of her office in overseeing these issues and obviously in dealing with complaints if they emanate through to her office, and also with what roles and responsibilities, beyond what she currently has, that we should be looking at.
I think it's helpful to get advice from the organizations with which her office is interacting. Obviously, financial penalties have been raised, and also some other increase in her adjudication role. There have been different schools of thought on that, as to whether that is better, worse, or fairer. Some people have said that it would make her the judge, the jury, and the sentencer all in one. Others have said that maybe the Privacy Commissioner does need those additional roles.
Have you folks looked at that in any more significant way? Have you compared and contrasted the regulations by the Federal Trade Commission in the United States—under which you're operating, to some degree—versus being under the auspices of our Privacy Commissioner here? Are there any specific things that you folks have learned from it that might be helpful to our committee in looking at some recommendations?