Okay.
I'm taking that to mean they're accepted in principle, which was the confusion in the first place. There may be some elements that were critical to Madame Deschamps' recommendations that don't find their way into the final framework that is put together, which I'm disappointed by.
Madame Deschamps, prior to your starting your external review, you were, in my opinion, hamstrung in a number of areas. For instance, the way the Canadian military police and judge advocate general's office handled sexual assault reports was excluded from scrutiny, meaning that the review was not able to examine the systematic failure to investigate or prosecute sexual crimes in the military. Do you believe that this should be examined?