Thank you, Madam Chair.
I rather agree with Senator Carignan on that. I had a look at what his requests are in terms of documents. It is workable, in my opinion.
I have in front of me the index that was sent to us on April 26. First of all, I would like the index to be redone. I can't use it because it's not a Word document; it's a PDF, or something like that. I can't do anything with it. The row with the titles of the columns should repeat itself on each page. Since the document is 900 pages long, it is easier to consult it when there is an indication of the page's contents at the top of the page.
Second, there is a lot of missing information. There is a call number, for example “cost 000370,” followed by “1‑27‑22.” I imagine that indicates the date, since the document is dated January 27. Then it says “planned blockades at three border crossings,” followed by “redacted 1‑27‑22, 4:44 a.m.” I assume it's an email, but there's no confirmation of that. I understand that this passage is redacted, but what is redacted? I don't know. I just know that it says “planned blockades at three border crossings.”
With all due respect, I would say that it is almost impossible for me to understand what document we are talking about when I only have that to go by. However, in my letter dated March 21, which is before you, we asked for an index with the title, the subject, the date, the number of pages and the language of the document. The subject would allow me to understand what the document pertains to, but what we have here is not very clear. I understand that the index is 900 pages long. I can't remember how many thousands of documents there are. I don't want to be tiresome, but I think that if we have to decide which documents we want and which we don't, we should have a better idea of what's available.
Third, I could not discern any chronological or alphabetical order in these documents. Maybe I'm not reading it correctly, but I didn't see any chronological order or alphabetical order. I don't know how I can sort this out in order to understand the logic of how these 900 pages are organized. I think it would be helpful if the people who designed this index were to repeat the titles on each page using a function in Word. It can be done in 20 seconds; it's not complicated. However, when you don't have access to the software commands, you can't do it. If that could be arranged for us, I would be very happy.
Fourth, it would be good to organize documents in a certain logical order, be it chronological or alphabetical, for example. The best way to organize them would probably be in chronological order. That would make things easier for us.
I also think that it will be quite difficult to come to a decision in a few hours. We'll have to take a longer look at the evidence. We will indeed probably have a better picture in the fall, once we have received the documents and had a chance to look at them.
That's my take on the situation. As I was saying, I am not satisfied with the response to the request made by the committee last fall. You will recall that the request was made last June. We resubmitted it in more official terms in the fall, and at the meeting held on February 27. I thought that last request might prove confusing and so I went to the trouble of writing a letter in which I clearly stated what we wanted. I was using the terms of our motion and making sure that the people at the Privy Council Office and those in charge of translation were on the same page as us.
I am still not satisfied. We have not yet received all the documents. I understand that turnaround times are long, and I respect that. I'm not in a position to assess whether those timelines are normal or not. I believe the people who tell us that. Mind you, when I talk about it, everyone seems very surprised.
In the case of one of the documents, we're talking about six or seven business days to translate 1,000 lines, which seems long to me. Maybe it's because I don't know anything about translation. Is it a question of manpower, equipment or tools? I have no idea. Still, it is surprising to learn that it takes up to seven working days to translate 1,000 lines. Mind you, if I were the one doing it, it would take longer. I'm not criticizing. I just raise it because I find it a little surprising.
As for the rest, if we had a better index that was easier to work with, as well as access to the documents requested by Mr. Carignan and Mr. Motz, I think we would be able to move forward.