I'll go to the nub of your question. I won't get into the weeds about the oversight and all that kind of stuff.
The simple challenge—and I'll put it in context for you. I have 35 years in the business and 20 at a very high level in national security matters. One of the differences would be that in that particular instance, where information was shared with the American authorities to the point of a database being shared with the authorities, there were policies in place, there were caveats that were supposed to be in place, that would have prevented the activities that led to the disclosure of information and the kind of terminology that was used.
It can be a temptation, if you're in a national security area and someone says top secret or classified, that no one else is going to see it. I can tell you from many years' experience that's not the case. These are tiny time capsules and the stuff comes out, and it did come out. If you knew that someone could come in and look at your program and find out if you're adhering to those policies and procedures, you would certainly be less tempted to do what occurred in that case, which is to forget about the policies and procedures, pull the caveats off, and just do a dump of information. That would not have happened because you know someone is going to look at it. This is not an area that's in a black box that won't be looked at. That's a major difference.
Right now, there's a curtain drawn around it and no one looks in it other than the RCMP.