Thank you for your question.
My recommendation was to establish an independent agency, but today, I would like to let the committee know that I am willing to allow for the benefit of the doubt to see how the proposal in the bill will address certain situations.
You are quite right to say that we are dealing with challenges. The people who participate in the witness protection program are often difficult to handle. They are used to a certain lifestyle and so on, which makes it all very difficult. I also agree with you that the more people get involved, the more difficult it becomes to manage the protection of information.
Internationally, the creation of an independent agency is considered good practice. We don't actually want the decisions about witnesses to be too directly, even solely, influenced by investigation and prosecution needs. The rights of those individuals and their families must also be taken into consideration. In addition, in similar cases, we must make sure that the decisions are not necessarily made based on costs and savings by providing less protection.
Once again, I am not saying that this is what is happening. I am not sure what really goes on when decisions are made. At any rate, that is the reasoning behind this type of recommendation. Based on my understanding of the new administrative provisions proposed to manage the program, I would say that the situation will be improved. Will that be enough? It is hard to say. We will have to see. I agree with you that, once passed, this legislation may well be in effect for a long time.
On the other hand, I think many people, both inside the RCMP, in the government, and outside, have given the issue some thought. For the time being, I think it is an acceptable compromise. However, I would like to remind you that I asked or suggested that everything must be evaluated in one way or another. If an evaluation is conducted and the results are made public, we will be able to determine whether the lawmakers made the right choice or not.