Public Safety committee  That's not necessarily a problem. Sometimes, the reflex may be to classify something that isn't necessarily secret. These are things that we deal with on a regular basis. The “secret” clearance is a good example. Going back to your example of the Winnipeg lab, I think it's also important to note that it's sometimes easier to make certain information public when the risk has been mitigated.

Public Safety committee  In the case of NSICOP and the National Security and Intelligence Review Agency, or NSIRA, there's really a process that has improved since they produced reports. First, we classify the reports produced. Then there is an exchange process that is done mainly with CSIS teams to determine, through a balancing of forces exercise, what can be made public, how it can be made public, or whether a summary can be prepared.

Public Safety committee  In a footnote, the report says that the conversation on cabinet confidence is ongoing. This is my understanding of the situation. It's not about whether or not she should receive more. It's about how she can use publicly the cabinet confidence documents she has received.

Public Safety committee  This allows me to give a couple of precisions. So far, 42,000 documents have been provided to—

Public Safety committee  What I can tell you for sure is that no incidents and no intelligence have been withheld from the commissioner. We have provided—and this is an extraordinary measure—some memoranda to cabinet to the public inquiry—

Public Safety committee  We have already said—and now we are trying to refine it a bit—that 8% of the documents we shared with the commission had some redactions for—

Public Safety committee  Thank you, Mr. Chair. Of course, we haven't shared with the commission things that were not relevant to her. It's impossible for me to determine how many documents we haven't shared with her.

Public Safety committee  We have not withheld any documents that are necessary for the work of the commission. She has all the relevant information she needs to do her work, and—

Public Safety committee  I don't have a number for you.

Public Safety committee  The relevancy test is being done in comparison to her terms of reference and the mandate she has. She received all relevant information she needed to accomplish her work. If I may give you a precision, my understanding of the footnote you are referring to in the interim report of the commission is that it's about whether or not the cabinet confidence we shared with her can be publicly released.

Public Safety committee  Thank you. I think cabinet confidence is really at the core of parliamentarians' democracy work. It is absolutely essential to make sure the decision-making process continues to work appropriately. This is not a political question. This is the core of our Westminster system—making sure ministers can freely share their opinions and that cabinet solidarity can be maintained.

Public Safety committee  What's also important to say, which is a very difficult paradox for our scientists, is that science is based on global collaboration. The culture of scientists is one of collaboration. This collaboration must not be undermined, but it must be done in an informed manner.

Public Safety committee  There are a number of ways to reconcile them. We started working very hard on that. Employees of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, or CSIS, and those of the Communications Security Establishment, or CSE, will increasingly meet with various stakeholders and will make public documents to increase Canadians' awareness, to ensure that they understand the various mechanisms used by foreign actors.

Public Safety committee  There are a number of small elements that would make significant changes. One is the ability of CSIS to engage with different levels of government and universities. Being able to provide more information to these various stakeholders will lead to better defence of all our Canadian institutions.

Public Safety committee  There has always been foreign interference. Unfortunately, there always will be some. The objective is to be able to detect it. Furthermore, we know very well that as we refine our legislative processes, foreign actors, on the other hand, refine their methodology. That's why the work you're doing in connection with Bill C‑70 is absolutely fantastic and necessary.