Nor have I seen reference to it elsewhere in recent years. The report is still, in my opinion, very sound. In 1980, I submitted a three-volume report of a commission of inquiry on the confidentiality of health information, which has also been mentioned. Employees go to them from time to time. The professional person is also an employee of the common employer.
Employees have an obligation to be frank with their employer.
The employer goes to the physician and demands information about other patients, other employees who are patients of the physician. And the second was access to one s own health information. Nothing was done about that until the Supreme Court of Canada in McInerney v McDonald did it. Again, the old problem of legislatures not doing anything about it and requiring courts to do it, and then criticism of the courts for being activist and doing things that legislatures should be doing. But in those stories, as recently as last week, about the physicians being asked to give information to the common employer and about access to one s own health information, not a reference was made to the fact that a very lengthy and expensive Royal Commission dealt with the problem and made recommendations.