Without touching on the specific cases you've cited, which I'm in no position to comment on in any case, there is always a tension in these issues in terms of what to share and what not to share. The intelligence business, fundamentally, gets some of the questions that others have asked earlier, particularly when you're dealing, as National Defence does, with all sources of information: signint, humint, imagery intelligence, etc. The issue of which source of information will give you the best of what you're looking for, and which is most credible and reliable in order to do what you think you need to do, operationally, is the constant struggle. Shifting through the volume of information, finding the pieces that are credible and reliable that pertain to the operation in which you are currently engaged is a huge amount of work.
There have been many cases, you cite, where not sufficient information was shared, be it because it wasn't found in time or because we were concerned about whether or not we could share it legitimately. There have been cases where information that unfortunately was not credible or reliable was shared and led to mistakes being made, operationally, of one kind or another.
Mistakes will continue to be made in this business. It's a difficult business, but having a clear framework within which you can make decisions around sharing is a benefit to the system.