It was still after their testimony on November 7. Even what you just said doesn't make any sense from a timeline perspective. The Globe story you referenced was at the beginning of October, yet it was only after their testimony before this committee that they subsequently heard from you that they were under investigation.
This whole thing is just bizarre in terms of the investigation, because you said the investigation started a year ago, but somehow, it was only within a couple of weeks of their coming before this committee to give damning negative testimony about the government in response to the questions they were asked that they were told they were under investigation and were subsequently suspended without pay.
Meanwhile, we had these very serious allegations against Minh Doan, which involve hiding information and deleting emails, and as far as I know there has been no action taken against him. The clearest difference to me between Mr. Doan and Mr. MacDonald and Mr. Utano is that Mr. MacDonald and Mr. Utano gave very blunt, critical testimony, whereas Mr. Doan obfuscated, prevaricated, didn't answer questions and gave every indication of trying to defend the party line.
I get the same impression here: That you, who are subject to the leadership of CBSA, are looking at one set of allegations against one set of individuals and not against others.
Maybe the best way to go from that is to ask you, sir, about your own reporting chain of command. You have characterized your investigation as independent, but you're not independent. Are you? You're part of the department. You're subject to the authority of the department and you're movable—reassignable—at any time. Is that correct?