Yes. I provided an anecdote previously.
One of the things is the PSDPA doesn't seem to understand the whole nature of culture within an organization. I would put this to members of the various parties in this committee: How willing would you be to step outside the party to criticize something that is occurring within the party?
Loyalty within the public service, I would say, is even more so than that, in that public servants, for the most part, really take to heart what their job is, yet the PSDPA uses words such as “good faith” and the definitions of many other words that I call “weasel” words. These are words that are open to interpretation, and the interpretation is controlled by the government.
In a sense, it is a really disabling feature that so much of the interpretation of the legislation is not in the power of the courts. It's definitely not in the power of the whistle-blower. It is an adversarial system that does not view them in good faith. I think, in that sense, we have a cultural misunderstanding about how difficult it is to be a whistle-blower.
To consider removing “good faith” from the clause and replacing it with another burden of proof.... I would say that enough has been levelled against the whistle-blowers. I think we should just remove the term “good faith” and not try to replace it with anything else.