Thanks, Chair.
I just want to go back to what I said earlier. Redaction will occur automatically on these reports of anything that gets released to this committee, so any information that is of national security concern will be protected. None of the departments will release to this committee anything that's a national security concern. They're mandated not to. In the end, they will release the redacted reports, as I stated earlier.
Being somebody with a top secret security clearance and having been on the national security file as a Canadian Armed Forces member for over 25 years—and I'm not taking away from anybody else on this committee, as we have former privy councillors on this committee as well, people who understand these issues very well—my point is that those redactions will occur, but we need those reports. We need those reports and we need those dates, because, again, that's what we've been mandated to do: to understand what the process was, how it happened and what aspects maybe are national security concerns—and again, those will be redacted.
Personally, I have no issues if we want to add an addition to the motion that says we'll send the complete reports with any national security concerns redacted to another committee to look at. There are other tools we can look at, like swearing people in to review it as well, so that it's being done by a committee of Parliament and not a committee of parliamentarians.
Look, I want to make sure it's crystal clear: Nobody protects, understands and will defend national security more than I do. However, as I stated, these reports, at least the ones that are written by the Canadian Armed Forces, are broken down so that each paragraph will be unclassified, confidential or secret, etc. That's how the reports are written when it comes to these after action reviews that are done after an operation—a post-op report.
I'll leave my comments at that for now.