No, because the process by which we released the documents was incredibly important.
Maybe I can rest on this moment for a second. National security is not the only issue present here. There's also consideration for protecting employee privacy, and if you're going to waive that.... The people who serve in the public service have that right—as in any job, by the way. I was head of Heart and Stroke. We let people go. Sometimes it was painful, because they would have a story of why they were let go that was completely inaccurate, but I wasn't allowed to comment. The reason I'm not allowed to comment is that employee confidentiality is extremely important. To waive that is a big deal. When we waive it, I think we have to think through these issues.
What I liked about this process was that a weakness was identified in NSICOP—challenging redactions. We were able to create a process in the ad hoc committee that allowed those, through an independent arbiter, to be released with maximum transparency while protecting the partnerships we have with our Five Eyes partners to make sure that employee information and national security are protected.
What I think is worth doing—