Once again, thank you.
We don't draw a distinction between the expertise of the Commissioner's office and that of the tribunals. In fact, the newly created tribunal would respect the Commissioner's expertise by virtue of the fact that it would have to attach considerable importance to the Commissioner's decisions.
In other words, the tribunal is providing more respect to the expertise of the commissioner by deferring to the facts, decisions and determinations made by the commissioner.
The second point about expertise is that the tribunal would see all of the cases related to privacy infractions and breaches. They would build that expertise, awareness and understanding over time, versus a scenario in which a court—any court and any judge—could be sought to sit on a given case. That is a very significant distinction.
It's about expertise in at least three ways in this case: the expertise to develop a facility to identify the right administrative monetary penalty; the expertise resident in the commissioner that becomes more respected because the tribunal must give deference to the commissioner's findings and facts; and the expertise in the tribunal itself, which becomes a much more expert body in hearing these appeals because it sees every single privacy—