Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'll just pick up where James left off, with the core issue that is in front of this committee, which is when members should be informed of these attacks. These attacks are simply a fact of life. They are massive, and they will increase.
I'm rather hoping this committee will grapple with how, when and where we are to be notified of these attacks, because, frankly, I'm given to understand that there are something like a million attacks a day on this organization, the Parliament of Canada. I don't think every member wants to be informed of every one.
In some respects, we're in a fortunate position in that the evidence at this point shows that we didn't actually suffer any damage. There was no breach and the firewalls held. Having said that, it is—and I adopt my friends' views—kind of embarrassing to learn from a foreign security service that we've had an attack. Frankly, I don't think that's quite acceptable.
The FBI tells the CSE, the CSE tells our security services, our security services are satisfied that the breach does not occur and we're in the dark. We're in the dark for two years, and we only find out about these attacks by virtue of the unsealing of an FBI document.
When we were briefed by the FBI, the FBI representative told us they felt outgunned—I think that's the word he used—50:1. These attacks are massive, and the FBI feels overwhelmed.
This committee needs, in my view, to start wrestling with our protocols. Clearly, the current protocols are not acceptable. For two years, the three of us, plus all of our other colleagues, were quite vulnerable.
I'm rather hoping this committee actually gets to the nub of it. I'm not interested in the blame game. I'm not interested in “we should have done this or done that.” Protocols need to be established, because everyone at this table, every one of our colleagues, is vulnerable. I'm rather hoping you take this example of vulnerability—which I don't think has entered into any kind of damage—and give instructions to those whom we ask to protect us.
We are all engaged—and, again, I adopt James's view—in multiple activities that create a vulnerability and are within our privileges as members of Parliament.
I support Garnett's motion, but I want this committee to focus on the protocols that would be appropriate.
Thank you.