I think you have to look at it holistically.
There are three different principles at play here. One is the supremacy of Parliament. Nobody questions that. Another one is the independence of the RCMP to, at their discretion, decide whether there's evidence for criminal prosecution or not. Third, there's a Charter of Rights, which is overriding and protects Canadians. You have to make sure that those three, when you administer, don't interfere with each other and that they work together harmoniously.
What a letter to the RCMP says.... When you ask Parliament to use its rights to ask for information and to furnish it to us, etc., we have to be very careful how we use it so that it doesn't either violate the charter or impinge on our independence.
That's the problem that exists, and it's a perfectly valid reason to state that it's an issue. How they will resolve it, I have no idea. I'm not involved in that. It would be the same if it involved my office and our investigation. We would have had the same problem of trying to reconcile these three principles that govern our system.