Then maybe we should get you in front of the committee here and understand exactly the nature of the review that you are conducting.
When it comes to aviation security, I know this issue certainly must be in front of cabinet, because there are some cabinet members who are not very happy with aviation security in this country and who don't view the way we're conducting it.... I agree with you to an extent, and I agree with the assessment that the honourable Minister of State made in saying that the system was ramped up after 9/11 and a lot of these decisions are knee-jerk. We need to go back and look at aviation security to understand what is effective and what works for people.
The frustration that travellers may feel sometimes at the way security is carried out is legitimate, and we need to have some understanding of where we're going with this system. Quite clearly, if you or your department had attended the forum that the Liberals and I conducted during the prorogation, you would have seen that the experts are saying that our system is not correct. It's not working. If I could characterize the aviation security system at airports, it's a Maginot line. It can be gone around very easily. Perhaps when you talk about behavioural identification, you're starting to realize that we need to identify threat, rather than simply provide a public relations gesture when someone enters the airport. That is extremely important, and I hope your review will take that into account.