Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Some of the information has certainly been very revealing. There's one question that I'd like to ask to kind of dig into one of your previous responses.
The onus is upon government departments. I certainly know that scarcity of resources is a reality that your office faces, but the onus is upon government departments and agencies and, by extension, entities like the RCMP and whatnot to reach out to your office. However, the precedent that I see is certainly not very good. The fact is that the RCMP—I'm looking at the timeline—waited three years after starting to use this type of technology to do a privacy impact assessment and only reached out to your office after this went to the media a couple of years after that. That's not a good precedent.
We saw that the same sort of dynamic existed when it was dealing with the use of mobility data, facial recognition technology, and the list goes on and on. The fact that the onus is upon departments certainly doesn't give me much confidence that proactive work is being done.
I'd ask for your feedback, I guess, on my interpretation—certainly as a second-term parliamentarian now—that a lot of work has to be done to ensure that privacy is respected in our government.