That's debate. But as I've done in the past when we've had public servants appearing before committee, I'm going to point committee members to Marleau and Montpetit, chapter 20, page 863:
The obligation of a witness to answer all questions put by the committee must be balanced against the role that public servants play in providing confidential advice to their Ministers. The role of the public servant has traditionally been viewed in relation to the implementation and administration of government policy, rather than the determination of what that policy should be. Consequently, public servants have been excused from commenting on the policy decisions made by the government. In addition, committees will ordinarily accept the reasons that a public servant gives for declining to answer a specific question or series of questions which involve the giving of a legal opinion, or which may be perceived as a conflict with the witness’ responsibility to the Minister, or which is outside of their own area of responsibility or which might affect business transactions.
The witnesses are not obligated to answer things that relate to policy or their relationship with the minister or the government. We're talking about the report in front of us and the strategic review that CFIA did.