I'll give you just two examples.
On restorative justice, the points of view are polarized. So we did sessions where people could express why they were afraid of restorative justice and how they would measure whether in fact their fears were real or not. If somebody moves on a restorative justice agenda, we ask them what guarantees they would like to see, with things like private and public security.
The very fact that we started this work brought, for example, the chief of police of Quebec to invite the CEO of a private security firm in Montreal so that they could talk together and see the difficulties and the way in which each of them could cooperate. That doesn't require a change of statute, but it was a hole that we were able to spot and to bring together all the players, the actors, to try to bring about a bit of a consensus.
There are some more charged issues, obviously, in public policy, where there are some more technical ones. In the report on federal security in intellectual property, for example, which is a more technical area, we were able to bring the commercial lawyers and small business.... We had the Ivey School of Business helping us—