I'll start by saying I think it depends a little bit on who's doing the reporting. Let's start with law enforcement and some of those law enforcement requests. We know that it took many years to even get to the point where law enforcement was tracking some of this kind of information. They did so largely because the demands for easier access to this information were being met with questions, “How often are you accessing this? Give us some actual data.” It turned out there was very little data to be had.
We now have some data, but I think it's still fair to say that there are many law enforcement branches that are either not fully collecting all this information or are using a bit of a haphazard mechanism. If there were requirements to disclose, there would also be requirements to more systematically collect.
It seems to me that, in fact, it's in the interests of not just of the public having access to information but of those organizations too. We have some of those same entities now saying they want to have easier access to this information, notwithstanding the 2014 legislative compromise and the Spencer decision from the Supreme Court of Canada. I think they've got an onus to at least begin to provide more data on what's actually been happening that moves away from the odd anecdote here or there.
At the moment, we're heavily reliant on what we can learn from either the Internet companies or some of the telecom companies without, as I mentioned, uniformity. I think we need to look at the other side of the coin as well in creating obligations for the systematic collection and then disclosure, and I think aggregating that information is very important.