If I were to ask him.... As my predecessor has said before in testimony, he was looking for top cover, for some protection or some coverage, that “yes, you will not have reprisal”. Even those simple words might have been important in enabling the complainant to pursue some particular avenue. Was PCO the right way to go? Perhaps it was, in terms of its ability to carry out a particular investigation like that. That's one option, but importantly, I think, the complainant, in the end, did not have confidence that an investigation by PCO would have worked very well.
Perhaps if we look at the Governor General's investigation and how that occurred.... It was extremely public. It was very public that PCO contracted out to have it done. There was a result. There was an outcome. Perhaps that would have given the confidence to the individual that it would have been the right way to go, but you can't expect that every member of the Canadian Forces knows what the competency of PCO is in carrying out something like this.
What we owe our members is some external body that can oversee these processes so that they are done fairly and meet the needs of the victim, but also meet the needs of due process as well.