The only comment I'd make is that the current federal Privacy Commissioner has a very interesting role as an ombudsman, as a privacy advocate, that she's able to do because she's not also judge and jury. She doesn't do any adjudication. Once you change that role, where now the Privacy Commissioner is also adjudicating, is also instituting penalties and so on, to some extent, then, it can affect the other role. So if the Privacy Commissioner were to have those kinds of powers, it's entirely possible that the balance that now exists in terms of the ability to be able to advocate, the ability to be able to work with privacy commissioners around the world, as this commissioner has done extremely well, may in fact be somewhat compromised. It just changes the nature of the balance.
So far we've had this law in place for well over a decade. It's worked reasonably well. It has allowed a certain flexibility and a certain ability to make recommendations without a heavy hand, with the backup of the Federal Court if in fact there is a problem that can't be resolved. I think most people in the industry think it's actually worked quite well.
I think you'd want to be very, very careful in upsetting the balance that now exists, in terms of giving powers when we don't know how exactly they're going to work.