Thank you.
In that we're doing a statutory review, I'll ask three questions. You might want to write them down, but I'll get them over quickly.
One concerns whether you might want to give us any advice on things that aren't working or you think we should change, etc. The other two questions are in the context of those very rare occasions when you get a police officer--I think there was one yesterday, actually, in this city--who has gone against the law, actually working inside the police station.
Under that scenario, have you seen any evidence or potential evidence under the way the law is written for one of two things to happen? One would be a couple of people with signing authority who are not working in the best interests of everyone else, who are criminals, using their authority to advance what they were doing related to corruption.
The second question, related to the same scenario, is this. If there were such a person in a police station, is there any possibility that the actors, being identified by having these permissions, being trained, being on the lists, would have their names leaked to--and this is very dangerous business we're talking about on occasion--organized crime so that the investigator is put at risk by having this more bureaucratic system? With more paper available to let the criminals somehow find out if they've got someone embedded in the police station, does that not identify the person they might suspect of infiltrating their organization?