Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for the welcome.
I agree with Mr. Julian. Having a breach of security of that size needs, at the very least, an explanation. I'm not sure who the best person to provide that explanation would be, but certainly the accountability rests with the minister, and I suppose with the president of CATSA.
At the very least, we ought to be able to get an indication of what it was that was breached, how it was breached, and what measures were taken to correct the breach. Secondly, I can't imagine that we wouldn't have an interest, on the public's behalf, in understanding what process was followed to renew the contract for Garda, given the fact that you had this breach not once but twice.
I think at the very least we need to support Mr. Julian's motion to see whether we can get some straight answers on this. If there's actually more to this than meets the eye—one would hope there isn't—at the very least we ought to then be able to assure the public that the breach was one-time, minimal, and of little consequence.
In the absence of that kind of information, I don't see how anybody could have anything other than an alarmist view of what has transpired.