Thanks for asking that, Mr. Turnbull, because I wouldn't want anyone to interpret my comments in any way in a partisan way, because I am the antithesis of that. That's why I don't want a vote in the House. I'm trying to avoid what would be a divisive vote.
I raised the issue of these gaps, the email system and such in the context that we're hearing from the reviewer, Mr. Johnston, that there was no sign of interference, negligence or anything like that in reaction to the reporting. I am simply asking how you can make those conclusions when the policy-makers who are making these decisions didn't see, hear, read or find a report.
With these gaps in the system of being briefed, how do we reach the conclusion that the decision-makers carried out their decisions in a way that was either competent or devoid of that?
I didn't mean it in a partisan way, but in the initial question you asked me, no, I have no insight on that side of the House. I spent my whole life in what was called “collection” in field and headquarters, collecting reporting and sending it over to the consumers of reporting, so I have no insight into the system and whether it.... I am simply going by what Mr. Johnston publicly disclosed he found and acknowledged were serious and significant gaps in sharing intelligence.