I think we have mechanisms making us capable—sometimes in camera—of receiving and asking difficult questions. The House of Commons has established a permanent committee now on security and intelligence, which is capable of going across the board in every department to follow the traces of certain cases. That is extremely important.
The challenge that we have is that the sitting members are elected—just like members of this committee—and at every election there are new members who come in with a new team, a new group that doesn't necessarily have the experience, the knowledge or the network to be capable of digging in as much as they should.
Should we have more committees like the SIRC, the security and intelligence committee, which went from watchdog to lapdog over time? They're not really doing as much work as they should be sometimes to observe, criticize and bring solutions to some of the problems.
That's the problem: Sometimes the political systems interfere with the work of the committee and the independence.
You mentioned in one of your earlier comments that you enjoy the non-partisan element of the committee and the work that has been done. That's what should be sought as much as possible because, at the end of the day, we should be working for this nation, not for our partisan interests.