Thank you very much, Mr. Lauzon.
First of all, just as a point of clarification, I was not the chief in Toronto for 39 years; it was only for 10. I actually began as a constable, and I held every rank in the Toronto Police Service before becoming its chief in 2005.
I appreciate your remarks, and I thank you for that.
I have spent most of my life trying to keep Canadians safe. I did that in various jobs I have held not only as the chief of police or as a minister of this government but also in a number of other fairly significant roles that dealt with national security issues and organized crime matters. I've had to deal with very confidential, secret information.
I've also been one of the people involved in collecting such information, so I know some of the risks that people who do that work face every day.
It has always given me an appreciation of the importance of intelligence work, but I think it's important to recognize what intelligence is.
First of all, there's just an enormous amount of information that people can have access to. Some of it is open source, and some of it is online. Some of it is from human intelligence sources, and some of it is maybe signals intelligence. There's just a cacophony of information.
The role of an intelligence officer is discernment. It's to look at that information and to analyze it to assess the credibility of its source—how it was collected, or what the motive of the person providing that information might be—and then to determine through analysis what they believe is happening.
The purpose of intelligence is to inform action. It really is to help decision-makers determine whether a criminal investigation should be done, or whether there should be action taken, for example, to address a security concern or a public interest concern.
That's the work I've been involved in for most of my life. I think it's important to acknowledge not only the importance of that intelligence function but also the limitations of it. It's not evidence. It's not proof of what's happening. It's just a really strong indication that governments, police services and the public need to be able to act on.
I've also always believed that, though I've lived in, and worked on the edge of, a secret world for a very long time, we should always err on the side of being as transparent with the public as possible, and our first priority has to be the safety of Canadians.
All of that is to say with respect to this information that I thought it very regrettable that the information about a threat to a parliamentarian was not shared with me when it was first collected. I would have, quite frankly, insisted that very assertive action be taken in order to provide that individual with all the information and the support they needed to be safe and to protect their family from that concern. We've subsequently taken steps to make sure that action will be taken.
I think there are real opportunities for Canada to improve its response to foreign interference and to the threat of hostile activities of state actors and non-state actors, and to better utilize national intelligence security information. We have extraordinary people, really credible and great people, working for us, but it is our responsibility to make sure that we create the best public value for that huge investment in the collection of that intelligence, and that we use that intelligence in an appropriate way to take the actions that are necessary to look after Canada's interest and to protect Canadians.