I guess there's probably a very fine line. I acknowledge what one of my colleagues said earlier on, that these are difficult days for everybody, including the RCMP. But when there is a question of the ethical behaviour of a representative of the RCMP or anybody else, the only way you can deal with that is if you have a body like one of these committees of representatives of the public, i.e., the legislators, who have the ultimate responsibility and accountability to the public--because they will lose their job if they're not believable--in an environment in which they could ask the very tough questions.
And as you say, here we are in an open environment. You're governed by privacy legislation and by other agreements, and you can't say exactly what everybody would want. But the legislators around the table, if they're sworn to confidentiality while they discharge their obligations, would provide that additional buffer that would satisfy the public that the police force did act according to those two basic principles that are the foundation stone of the program.