There are some similarities, but I think there are also some important differences. In the case of the former Privacy Commissioner, there were issues around treatment of staff, which is similar to this case, but many of the findings, the serious findings, were related to financial improprieties, which we did not find--and we do financial audits. In fact, after the case of Mr. Radwanski, all the officers of Parliament agreed to have financial audits done every year in order, again, to give some assurance to parliamentarians that the financial management was appropriate. So I think that issue has been stemmed.
Here, I think, the issue that did not come up with the former Privacy Commissioner was the carrying out of the mandate. There was no question that Mr. Radwanski was not actively engaged in his mandate as Privacy Commissioner.