Okay.
Now, in your opening statements, and I don't know if it was in your first or second testimony, you talked about a two-tier level of justice, but only in relation to the fact that SNC-Lavalin eventually did not receive the DPA and, ultimately, as we know, pled guilty to one count of fraud.
That's not the focus of the question. The focus is that, in my view, there is a perception among Canadians and numerous members—me included—that there was a political non-appetite by the RCMP to conduct a thorough investigation.
Prior to the commissioner's attendance not too long ago, they had close to four years of investigating this particular matter. Unlike the former Ethics Commissioner, who essentially interviewed 14 witnesses—you included—the RCMP interviewed four.
Now, I know you've already opined that you're not going to talk about police operations, but given that discrepancy, do you think there is a disconnect between in terms of how the Ethics Commissioner approached this investigation versus the RCMP?