I agree with almost everything David had to say, and I'm sure he knows that.
I take a slightly different academic look on that. I don't think the government is responsible for Canada's national defence or the civil control of the armed forces. Parliament is responsible for the control of the armed forces. The civil authority in a democratic system is civilians elected to Parliament. The government is accountable to Parliament for the execution of policy and so on.
Not to debate the point too far, I agree entirely that Parliament and members of Parliament need more information. They need more background, and if I may say, with respect, members of Parliament need to do more work to find out what's going on so that they can carry out their responsibilities.
I would disagree with Professor Bercuson on the point that once the decision is made to go to war--and I know he didn't mean it that bluntly, or along that sharp a line--that it's then up to the military. What I think was often missing in Canadian operations through the time in Bosnia--you'll remember Somalia--was active, informed oversight by Parliament of these kinds of missions, for any number of reasons.
I think things have changed dramatically in the last number of years, and I would encourage this committee, the House, and the other place to become much more involved in the oversight of military operations and so on, not to the point of second guessing what's going on; I would hope oversight in the sense of saying, do you guys have enough? Do you know what your mission is? Do you know where you're going? Do you need more money? Do you need more support? That kind of oversight I'm sure would be greatly welcomed.