In cases where people suffer damages, for example, or are victims of assault, I believe that both they and members of the public have the right to know. When the police get involved in this kind of activity, it's fairly serious. We're not talking about speeding on the highway, as Mr. Lee was saying. When police officers commit offences that are a direct attack on the integrity of the person, in principle, the public has a right to know. At the same time, some information can remain confidential.
That brings me to the matter of in camera meetings. One certainly understand why, in certain cases, parliamentary committees may need to sit in camera. An independent oversight group could also examine these issues in camera, much like the Security Intelligence Review Committee, for example. I just thought I'd mention that example in passing.