I'll take them.
I want to go back to the conversation we were having about BGRS. We've gone over the issues of the hack and what that breach caused for members.
It's my understanding that this was only the latest issue with that contract. In fact, the RCMP had been on contract with the same company for relocation services and had repeated issues with BGRS, and that led them to bring those relocation services back in-house.
Could you tell the committee what analysis was done on whether to end the contract? Why was it chosen after all of these issues and with all of that history from the RCMP as well? Why would DND then chose to retender and renegotiate that contract as opposed to doing what the RCMP did, which was to bring it in-house?