Currently, the bill gives my office the authority to issue orders.
Most cases would probably involve the use of orders instead of administrative monetary penalties. The bill does a good job of prescribing the use of penalties. It lists the factors that must be taken into account, including the organization's approach and diligence, and whether it complied with a certification program. Whether the organization acted in good faith really matters, as do the efforts it made.
My office has the authority to issue orders, which is extremely important. I think the penalties are high enough, but with the use of orders, it's possible to put a halt to the activity and the collection of the information. Both of those are very important. Persuasion and negotiation are also tools, of course. That's why we recommended the use of compliance agreements, something the minister agreed to. That ability is also very important.
My preferred approach is to use dialogue and to encourage organizations to make the right decisions before they go astray.