Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
Through you, I'd like to thank the witnesses for being here today. I want to follow up a little bit on some of the questioning we've heard today.
Gentlemen, in your expertise I'm hearing a lot of the same conclusions, which are actually identified in the special rapporteur's report with respect to the governance of the communication between the intelligence community and the machinery of government. This problem has been identified and you've alluded to it as well.
Mr. Wilczynski, you brought up a very interesting topic about education and about training people to understand what is intelligence and what is evidence. It takes years to be a consumer and understand completely what intelligence is. For full disclosure, my son is an intelligence officer with the Canadian Armed Forces. Trust me: We do not have conversations around the kitchen table.
However, in Mr. Johnston's report, he clarified very clearly that he had access to cabinet information, that he had access to top secret information and that his conclusions were based on evidence. In the annex, he includes a top secret reference, which shows how he got to where he got to in terms of his decision.
He has also offered the leaders of the opposition access to top secret clearance to get access to the same information, so parliamentarians can see this to determine for themselves whether or not his conclusions were sound. They may not agree with the conclusions and they can say publicly that they don't agree. However, they've been offered that.
What are your thoughts on that?