I'm not sure I understand the question. The Government of Canada has very clear rules on access to information and what can or cannot be redacted. For anything that is not made available, there should be a good rationale.
Obviously my going-in position is that unless we're going to be contravening a particular act or violating somebody's privacy in a way that is currently specified in the legislation, I want to make sure that I'm helpful and I'm providing information that makes sense to Canadians. That's what the intent of that legislation is.
If I were offside of that legislation, I'd want to make sure that I corrected it, but with the intent that always we want to be helpful. That's what we do day in and day out: disseminate usable information that people can consume to make decisions. I would want to make sure that I retain that approach.