Just as a private citizen, I read somewhere where a government minister said that all of the recommendations in part one, which would include what you're talking about, have been implemented. I don't know if they have or haven't, but certainly as far as waiting for the Air India inquiry is concerned—and once again I'm speaking as a private citizen—I don't think it would be of assistance, as far as the issue you are talking about are concerned. What we're talking about here is dealing with countries with very poor human rights records, and realistically, as some witnesses have stated before us, in order to get information in respect of particular parts of the world we have to engage with partners that do not have great human rights records. If that's the case, then I think the decision to enter into that kind of a relationship should be a political one. It should not be made by a police agency or a security intelligence agency. I think that's a political question, and all Canadians should participate in that debate.
If we are going to have such a relationship, which realistically I think we have to, unfortunately, then we have to be very careful in terms of the information we send in respect of Canadians. We have to ensure that the information will not in any way be used in respect of human rights abuses. And in respect of information we receive from these agencies, we have to be realistic enough to know the public record, and the public record is that they engage in torture. If we get any information from these foreign agencies, we have to be realistic to understand that it's subject to torture and is likely unreliable, and we had better do a very good reliability assessment on it before we act on that information.
The kinds of issues I've just reviewed really are not part of the Air India inquiry, and there would be no need to wait for the recommendations of Justice Major to deal with those issues, which are very important.