I do. I think that would provide clarity in how it is interpreted by the commissioner, obviously, as well as by the courts, and it would provide a strong signal from the legislative branch of the importance it accrues to privacy.
However, as I mentioned, in many respects, I'd love to see this in some core provisions that are ultimately going to serve as a testing ground when there's analysis, when you make the determination, for example, of whether consent is appropriate or whether it is for the appropriate purpose. That's when you can begin to bring in that privacy is a fundamental right, because at that stage, you're engaged a bit in some of that balancing, rather than the more overarching side, which, it seems to me, may come at a later date. A court is reviewing a decision. Did the commissioner take adequate account of the fact that privacy has that elevated status?