Thank you very much.
I want to turn to the larger context, because I think what you've told us today is that there was a real incident focus in terms of the allegations and investigations. Let's look at the timeline of what was going on at the same time.
In March, when the allegations about General Vance and his NATO posting became public, Madam Deschamps was already investigating the problem of sexual misconduct in the military. Her report was released in April, saying sexual misconduct was a problem and that there was a culture tolerated it.
By the time you had two additional allegations in July against the chief of the defence staff, which would have been known both to senior staff in the minister's office and the Prime Minister's Office, and probably to the Minister of Defence himself and the Prime Minister, did anyone look up from this incident-based focus and ask if this was the person we should be appointing as chief of the defence staff at this time, given multiple allegations of sexual misconduct in the face of the report the government had just received from Madam Deschamps on the sexualized culture in the Canadian military?