We certainly looked at a lot of models to build this one. I think the discussion that took place in front of this committee certainly led us where we wanted to go. As you have seen, this model is very simple to use. This was one of our main objectives, to make it as accessible as possible at the same time as making it as secure as possible. Those were two objectives that we had.
The main issue is the paper petition. With electronic petitions, you can imagine that once it's on the web it's already translated. It's on the web and it's in an electronic format. The responses we'll get from the government departments once the responses are tabled will also be made available electronically. When we have paper petitions, first of all they're not translated most of the time. Sometimes we get two petitions on the same subject and you can see that they are the translation of the same petition, but most importantly, they're usually not translated. That's the first thing.
We have a huge volume, at least 3,000 petitions every year, and they're not electronic. With the response we get from the department, the way it exists today is that there are only responses to petitions numbered 114, 244, etc. That's the only thing you get, and the text, with the response. Nowhere in the process do we have the electronic format of the petitions and the translation of each petition. This is something we need to look at for the next phase, and after that it's putting them on the web. You can imagine that 3,000 petitions is not a small thing. This is the main issue that we have.