Procedure and House Affairs committee  Thank you. That provides a little bit of guidance for me. I heard your comments earlier on concerns that you have about a public inquiry. I personally think that it's still needed, because we're at a point now where Canadians are feeling so much concern that I don't know how else we can do this.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  Thank you, Chair. Of course, everything I say goes through the chair, and I want to thank the witness for testifying here today. I'm really happy you're here, because I'm hoping you'll be able to clarify something. I've been asking about the ability of the President of the United States to declassify information as needed.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  Thank you, Chair. I really appreciated the earlier comments about the need to protect future elections. We know that in past elections there were concerns, but we know that they didn't have an impact on the outcomes. All parties have agreed this is the case. I hear very clearly about improving our laws.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  I believe that's my time.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  Thank you. That's extremely helpful. With regard to the questions my previous friend was asking you in reference to public inquiries and having, perhaps, someone outside of our country be the lead of that, I think that's an innovative and interesting idea. We've heard a lot of testimony that foreign interference is changing.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  It might be an idea for our countries to come together to talk about how we might address these issues internally because, of course, the concern that I think Canadians have is that there is a feeling of mistrust. You talked about how NSICOP is there. That is an avenue for discussion, but that information isn't public.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  Thank you very much, Chair. As always, all of my questions are through the chair. I want to thank the witness for being here today. I really appreciate some of the testimony. I think it's challenging. This is a challenging discussion. I think, at the end of the day, the focus I have is that Canadians are increasingly having a sense of distrust in our systems.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  Thank you so much. It sounds from your testimony like there were no big groups of folks proposing that this community be moved from the current riding into a different one. I'm wondering if I could ask both of you, what would be the consequences within the region you serve if these current boundaries were maintained, Mr.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  “Give or take”. I like that. Thank you to everyone who is here testifying today. Of course, it's very lovely to see Mr. Nater in the chair and always nice to have a little change. I think this comes back to a process question. In this committee, we've heard a lot about the fact that in the initial public input process, if people are content or don't have major concerns with it, they don't show up, and when there's a dramatic change, then people are very frustrated when they don't get an opportunity to respond to it.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  Mr. Davies.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you to all of our witnesses here today. I'm just going to ask a simple question. I'll allow all of you to answer it, because it is probably the last round. What are the most concerning consequences if the current boundaries are kept in your community?

Procedure and House Affairs committee  Thank you so much for this, Chair. I also want to be on the record that it was disappointing to see the Liberals filibuster. However, I also recognize how important it is that we continue our work on foreign interference. At this point, if we don't ask for an extension, it means we will be undermining that study.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  Thank you. Through you, Chair, [Technical difficulty—Editor] I agree that this work needs to be taken out of the partisan environment of Parliament. I [Technical difficulty—Editor] why did the PM not instruct Mr. Johnston to set the terms of a public inquiry [Technical difficulty—Editor] than to decide whether or not to even have an inquiry?

Procedure and House Affairs committee  If a public inquiry had started three months ago, I don't think we'd be sitting here in this room today, but I'll leave that to you. My last question [Technical difficulty—Editor] presidents do have the ability to declassify information at will. In a [Technical difficulty—Editor] situation, where the government has classified information to clear the air, it would be helpful if it were declassified without necessarily disclosing sources and methods [Technical difficulty—Editor] that would concern national security.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  Nothing changed.