No, I don't think it is sufficient.
I didn't have time to deal with that in my opening remarks, but I read through the whole bill, which was a task in itself.
No, I think it says that the report should go to the RCMP, to the complainant, and to the agency that does the oversight, but not to Parliament or to the public. I think it has to, because it could undermine public credibility in the institutions if the public doesn't know.
For example, if it hadn't been for the public campaigning on behalf of Mr. Arar and the other people who were hurt by these renditions to the Middle East to be tortured and so on, if the public hadn't clamoured, we wouldn't have had the Arar commission. We wouldn't have had the Iacobucci commission, and so on. I think to maintain credibility in government institutions it's necessary to give those reports not just to Parliament, but they also should be made public.
This is the second report of Judge O'Connor. Anybody can get it. It's good that they can get it. It can be studied by academics. Further, it can contribute to a better understanding and better support for our oversight system and our public security system.