That's a very thoughtful response, because that could be the explanation. The first two answers were, it doesn't exist, there is no questionnaire, which put a drop of skepticism in my mind when I was later told it was a national security issue. But the tens of thousands of strangers from a strange land are hearing these things. They are not signing any secret affidavit about what questions are asked of them. I think that this is one. What you suggest is a possibility, but I would suggest that a government operating with a bias towards openness would tip the other way.
My analogy of Stephen Harper prosecuting the war in Afghanistan, I think, is very fitting. During that time, access to information was a major tool used by the Liberal opposition and others to enquire about the treatment of Taliban prisoners. That, surely, could have been swallowed up by the same concern you're suggesting. We can't talk about that in a time of war. Well, we did, because things of such a grave nature must be tested.
If there's a true secret there...but I don't even understand how that could be...asking someone who's...Canada what documents to show. I don't know how that could be any more secret than the war secrets that were scrutinized in the Taliban prisoners. Yes, that's a possibility, but it doesn't explain the other 300-day exemptions that we seem to be getting from this department. I'm a deep skeptic.