I think the cases on parliamentary privilege and my work as law clerk have shown that courts have recognized, rightly, the fundamental role of Parliament, the fundamental role of the House and its committees, and the need for the House and committees to have the ability and the powers to do their work and to do so in cases covered by privilege in an autonomous way that's not going to be subject to review elsewhere. At the same time, I've always advocated to the House and committees that having this authority and this power is something that ought to be exercised responsibly, having regard for the public interest consideration and turning your mind to this.
In the context of privacy, there are similar aspects there, where I firmly believe privacy to be a fundamental right and it has to be protected. At the same time, I don't see privacy as being opposed to the public interest or to innovation. You can have both—you need to have both—and, as commissioner, I would work towards that goal.