I don't know.
I'll say this: There are three pieces to the transparency of a screen, and two are already legislated and should be happening.
First of all, the screen itself is supposed to be reported and published. I believe I see people in this room who had their screens published, so that exists.
Second, recusals, when they happen, are supposed to be published and reported, and they're probably available.
The missing piece is that when a staff member or the screen administrator screens something away so that it never gets to the public office holder, there is a gap in the act. The act doesn't say this needs to be reported somewhere. That could be fixed up.
The act has been around for 18 and a half years and the screen has been around for 18 and a half years.