First of all, let me go over the figures from the last financial year in broad terms. There were 151 requests for general information. If we take away the files where the discloser realizes that there is after all another way of going about it—because, ultimately, we want the best act, the best procedure for dealing with the request and because private interests are often involved—there are 76 allegations of wrongdoing, or disclosures, and 23 reprisal complaints. When all the accounting was done at the end of the financial year, there were 15 active disclosure files and one under investigation. After the preliminary review, there are two files that we deal with in more detail in our annual report.
I mentioned 23 reprisal cases. Of those, 21 were dealt with under the act and one other file, quite a significant one that had been ongoing for several years, was closed. There is one other that is briefly mentioned in the annual report. When we say that we have referred a case to be dealt with under other existing acts, we mean, for example, to the office of the Auditor General, to the Public Service Staffing Tribunal, the Human Rights Commission, and the list goes on. There again, even if we ultimately have no jurisdiction in dealing with a file—and I would like to tell you that, for 76 disclosure cases and 23 reprisal cases, a lot of time and attention is required—we often have to talk with the discloser, first to provide him with some guidance. We also have to ask what his objective is, what he expects to get out of the complaint. This also sheds a lot of light and, once more, gets us involved in all the cases to channel them. Sometimes the discloser realizes that he is knocking on the wrong door. Sometimes, too, people are very emotional; we are their last resort. So, for each file, we look at all the relevant parts of the legislation, and my office cannot get involved if there is a process already underway.