The agency that's been proposed for review by Judge O'Connor would do two things: it would receive complaints and investigate them, and it would have the power to initiate audits. I agree with Alex that the agency's being there with full powers would have a deterrent effect. As Shirley Heafey pointed out, in Calgary, because the police know that they are so ineffective, they cooperate and they have a high approval rating. If it became known to the agency that the RCMP was still sharing information without caveats, they could launch an audit themselves, without complaints. This way they could find out what was really happening with sharing information, and also with the processes for checking up on accuracy and relevancy with respect to labelling.
That's why it is not only the review agency that is important, but also the implementation of the 23 recommendations. Although we have the letter from Minister Van Loan saying that they have implemented 22 out of 23, there's really no information there to say.... I think members of Parliament and the public need to know exactly what is going on with respect to the recommendations, whether they should be verified or screened for relevancy and accuracy. How are you going to make sure that we're not going to get people labelled as Islamic extremists when they're not Islamic extremists?
So it's not just the review; it's also the 23 recommendations. This is very important.