Yes, it is indeed.
I would also indicate that we are open to the advice of the Office of the Privacy Commissioner for any additional advice that may be forthcoming or actions that we should take. Similarly, we have consulted with third party experts in the industry. We are open to advice and best practices from any quarter that can help us achieve the standard we are after, but yes, that is the direction.
Let me indicate two particular areas. The data loss protection software that will be put in place, as I understand it—and my colleague the chief information officer can correct me if I wander into the swamp—will be deployed throughout our system, allowing us to monitor when there has been any inappropriate transfer of data. That's built right into the software. The system can be designed such that the folks who monitor such things will know when, in effect, a flashing light goes on and says that data has been transferred in an inappropriate way, against the protocol or the standard. We would then be in a position to go in and ask, in a very precise area, why that data was transferred in a way that's not appropriate.
That's a technological response, but what we're after is avoiding any inappropriate handling or transfer of data in the first place. The very merit of our institution is founded on human dignity—that's why we protect individuals' information—and concern for human beings, and that's why we have the programs we do.
The other side of that coin is that human beings run the system, and there can never be any absolutely fail-safe system. However, in terms of that human culture, we want to be an organization that is excellent in everything we do, one in which individuals know their part in the larger scheme of things and will handle Canadians' information carefully and sensitively and according to the rules.
That's what we're after, and that's the direction in which we're going.