It's inherently important, I think, in a way, to reassure Canadians that the systems we have in place are working as they should.
I might also submit that we need to perhaps have a bit more of a nuanced conversation about the type of review and the type of oversight that is appropriate for different agencies. With regard to CSIS and CSE, I think we need a much more robust review mechanism, because of the activities in which they are engaged, as opposed to intelligence agencies—we don't often think of them as intelligence agencies—such as the RCMP, CBSA, and the Department of Foreign Affairs. They of course are also engaged in intelligence collection, but not in a context that is as...perhaps has the potential for constitutional or legal violations in the same way that CSE and CSIS are.
I think we need to have a discussion or conversation about CSIS and CSE that is separate from the discussion of what I would say are the core five members of national security, that is separate from the discussion of the 15 or so security agencies that look after national security, and that is different from the discussion that we need to have with the Department of National Defence.