Yes, except parliamentarians. It's not a holy grail, though. There's lots of stuff to study on behalf of parliamentarians.
The other thing, in terms of consequences, is this would open up a considerable set of challenges. It's important for members of this committee to understand that security vetting is done by CSIS. CSIS security vetting results in a recommendation, usually to a deputy head or deputy minister. That recommendation is just that: it's a recommendation only. It would be up to whomever would be responsible for approving the security clearances or denials for parliamentarians to make a judgment. How would that process work? I'm not entirely clear on how it would work favourably.
Frankly, members, I would also be very concerned about the rigour of CSIS security clearances in that process, because they would be faced with the challenge of, on the basis of some ambiguous information about loyalty, trustworthiness and background, whether they really want to get into the grip of denying a security clearance to an elected member of Parliament. I would really be concerned about the impact on CSIS security clearance culture, which is already challenged enough.
Thank you.