What they've claimed is that they built the software and they never touched the data. That's an actual argument. They've said that they never had access. They didn't touch the data, they said, or they had small pools of data. They were careful to massage around it, but clearly they built the programs or software. They used the data to actively interfere. They did break certain other rules in the U.K. We know about that.
Does the RCMP have the cybersecurity to look at it from a stolen data perspective? What about looking at it simply in terms of interfering with the democratic process? There are two separate things. One thing is that, okay, they stole something, and the other thing is what they're doing with what was stolen.