Government Operations committee  I don't want to repeat what I've said before and waste the committee's time, but something did come up earlier this evening when there were questions about the definition of wrongdoing. I do think that definition is much too narrow. You talk about “gross mismanagement”. Well, it

Government Operations committee  I would agree with that. I think there is difficulty in relying on the good faith obligation. I'm not condoning bad faith disclosures, but oftentimes people think of good faith as having, for example, a proper motivation. So if somebody is disclosing something because they want

Government Operations committee  I can't really answer that. I believe my clients have been making legitimate disclosures, or at least attempting to. I would imagine it's not far off, because we're dealing with human nature.

Government Operations committee  I can see that there could be a personal impact. Investigations such as that are stressful. There would be a period of time where they're suspected of something. If they were to retain their own counsel, there would be a cost associated. So there could be implications there.

Government Operations committee  I've seen it happen.

Government Operations committee  Yes, I agree. That can be a problem.

Government Operations committee  I don't think so. I think that taking up that kind of litigation is going to be costly, can be difficult, and is uncertain. I think a regime that allows a body like the commissioner, or the equivalent of the commissioner, to do investigations of an expert body would be better, as

Government Operations committee  I'm actually not sure what the standard would be in that other situation. I'm not sure how a court would approach that. Certainly, it would be the civil burden of proof—right?—the balance of probabilities, etc. If you are proving reprisal, it's the same burden of proof. It's a ba

Government Operations committee  Yes.