I'm having a hard time understanding. My comments are directed to the parliamentary secretary, because he should be comfortable with this subject matter. The Liberals created a situation when they decided to put domestic security in the hands of a private firm.
You're telling us that we cannot question representatives of CATSA when the head of this agency had ties with Garda and a laissez-faire attitude has prevailed. There have been security breaches. Contracts are being renewed and parliamentarians are being told that they cannot ask questions about Canada's domestic security.
I'm having trouble accepting this, Mr. Jean, but I don't want you to feel uncomfortable. The Liberals have created a situation that greatly concerns me. I'm trying to understand your message, but I think CATSA representatives should account to the committee for the contracts awarded by the agency. Security breaches have occurred. Why should these firms' contracts be renewed when they failed to do the job on several occasions?
I think that in such instances, we should be allowed to ask questions. I'm prepared to discuss this with you if you ask for an in camera meeting or if you want us to bring in certain measures, but I can't quite get my head around the fact that it's impossible for parliamentarians to have discussions with the people responsible for domestic security, ostensibly because we're dealing with a private firm.