Thank you. I appreciate that, and I apologize to the interpreters. I didn't realize that had happened. Thanks for pointing that out.
I don't know the intention of the Conservative Party of Canada. Are they going to come in and just wipe out all departments and wipe out everybody else—nobody is trustworthy other than them? They can just go up to the mic and make accusations. They don't want briefings. They don't want to know what the evidence holds.
If there is something stated in a note, what we learned is that the ministers and the Prime Minister are not briefed on every single piece of intelligence that comes forward, or even exchanges of documents that happen at the departmental level. That is what we heard.
We should maybe be recommending from this committee that there are certain types of things—and we had those discussions today—that when they rise to interference and intimidation of a member of Parliament from being able to carry out their duties, it's very important that the minister is made aware of that. I think the departments have now realized that, too, after what happened and having had these conversations at this committee.
If we're looking for some honest results to come out of this, I think the rule should be that we make sure we strengthen our system so that doesn't happen, so intimidation doesn't happen by foreign actors.
Even internally, our constituents are allowed, of course, to give us their opinions on matters and inform us as to how we should vote on matters. If it were to rise to a level where we're being intimidated or threatened, or family members are being threatened if we don't take a particular action—as we saw just happen in the Senate—then that rises to a level of great concern.
Therefore, it should be taken very seriously by the public safety minister. As there is an investigation in the Senate right now about that too, I think they are now seeing how important this is. Having the study here at this committee I think has brought some light to that.
I stand with Mrs. Romanado's amendment to paragraph (B) item (iii) that the departments and agencies that are tasked with gathering these documents should apply redactions according to the access to information and privacy acts. If we're seeing any types of documents, I think that is standard. That should be done, unless we're going to get some kind of special security clearance and view everything in camera and all of that.
I don't know whether that's a process that could be undertaken; that's not written here or anything like that. I think in the absence of that, we should be applying this amendment and voting in favour of it.
Thank you, Madam Chair.