Currently, we no longer wait. We receive solid collaboration from the institutions, who now understand the challenges we face. We speak to one another and try to resolve the complaints in a friendly and informal manner. We speak to the complainant. Sometimes we agree to disagree, and that's all right. That is my work. If an act says something and I come to the conclusion that it was not complied with, I make a recommendation or issue an order, and then we decide whether to take it further and go to court.
Unfortunately, last year, with the amendments made to the act, we were allowed to publish our investigation reports for the first time. There are 35 years of precedents and complaints that were investigated and settled. No information had ever been published, except in the annual reports. This caused me a great deal of frustration, particularly when I was getting ready to apply for the position. I was looking for information about the institution and could find nothing about the number of decisions and all the investigations. The first thing I decided was that we would begin to prepare summaries and provide case summaries so that people could at least know that we were being consistent.
When I issue a decision concerning National Defence and cite a specific section, I interpret it in exactly the same way as I would for any other institution. We have begun to publish our guidelines, including guidelines on our interpretation of the act, and we are beginning to gradually finalize our investigations. We've been able to publish these only since June, so the more investigations we can complete—