Thank you, Madam Chair.
Gentlemen, at the beginning I said that I could not correctly assess your report. Having listened to you for an hour and a half, I can, nevertheless, share with you my vision and my conclusions on this issue. I am going to make some comments, but you are not obliged to respond.
Mr. Lynch, in your opening remarks, you said that the investigation was comprehensive and independent. I believe that it was independent. However, I doubt that it was comprehensive, since as you said yourself, the deadlines were too short. Because you did not have enough time and there was not sufficient investment in this investigation, your report contains a great deal of "maybes".
For example, in the second-last paragraph on page 6, it says:
[...] there are indications that information about the meeting between Senator Obama's advisor and Consul General Rioux was known to the media prior to this date, possibly as early as February 28.
There it says "possibly". In the second-last paragraph on page 8 it says: "there are indications that". On page 9, it says, in paragraph 5.1: "it appears probable". There are a great deal of "may haves" and "it appears". Never does this report, except perhaps when it addresses the facts, mention that you have found such and such a piece of information, and never do you make definitive statements. I find that there are a great many "may haves", but that is an opinion.
Mr. Cummins, I do not think that you were given all of the necessary authority. The Canadian press at the time reported that representatives of the government had indicated that they were not looking to discover the source of the initial leak. Perhaps there could have been an agreement with the U.S. government to contact Associated Press. When you receive a fax, there is always a number that enables you to trace the origin. I don't think that you were given all of the necessary authority to conduct a comprehensive investigation which, in my view, was well done. I believe, like the journalists of the day and everyone else, that it was in the interest of someone somewhere to leak the information. History may perhaps reveal more about this.
The Department of Foreign Affairs, staff and officials seem to have made a considerable number of mistakes over the past few years. I find that very damaging and astonishing. I have travelled, and I have met these people. They seem to me to be highly competent and professional, but for some time now, they are always mixed up in situations that show some incompetence or lack of experience and professionalism. Moreover, the recommendations in the report are always made with reference to staff at the Department of Foreign Affairs. However, I am not convinced that these people are responsible for all of the leaks and the mistakes made by the Department of Foreign Affairs that are currently in the news.
I will stop here, and I thank you for having appeared before us.