Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to the witnesses.
I can understand, Mr. Waldman, the frustration, if you've worked on these files, and it's why I think most of us agree that we need changes to the process.
I might say, though, that I think you've dramatized it somewhat, because the subcommittee of this committee was taken through a dossier of someone who was being held under a security certificate, an alleged Iranian assassin. It was quite a thick booklet. This was in an open meeting, and the only things that were whited out were the sources of the information. And I might say that whoever the sources were, they were corroborated many times. In the end, the representative of the B.C. Civil Liberties Association agreed they wouldn't want someone like that living next door to them.
Nonetheless, I understand your point, that the information is not as fulsome as one would want it to be. That's why the government I think has responded with this special advocate. Our subcommittee, which looked at this, called for a special advocate counsel as well.
I just have a question with respect to SIRC. It's an interesting-sounding proposition that you're advancing here. I understood there were some limitations on what information is available to the members of SIRC. In fact, I remember hearing from SIRC that they were not privy to certain operational matters; in fact, they complained somewhat about that.
Are you saying—and the important question is whether—SIRC would have access to all the sources of information that CSIS and the RCMP and other agencies relied on to cause them to request a security certificate?