I'll forgive you, Mr. Chair.
To steal a page from Mr. Norlock's book, when people in my riding hear the term “provost marshal”, I don't think they probably.... Well, a considerable number of them did go through CFB Chilliwack and would have an idea of what we're talking about, but I understand that he is also known as the commander of the Canadian Forces Military Police Group.
I think we have to assign fairly significant weight to his testimony when he says “...due to the transparency clauses that exist—the interference complaint process under part IV of the NDA—those types of safeguards certainly make it more robust. It allows me to make sure that there is an avenue of approach, should there be a conflict.”
If the commander of the Military Police Group doesn't see an issue here, and also Chief Justice LeSage did not see an issue here, how do we not place greater weight upon their testimony and their expertise than upon that of political appointees?