Mr. Chair, they were not on operational matters. They were on administrative matters. I will admit that the wording of the MOU leaves a lot to be desired, and I appreciate the fact that the Office of the Auditor General has drawn that to our attention.
I can tell you that it was an unusual situation. As Mr. McRoberts said earlier, this was the first time any such MOU had been in place between the Ottawa Police Service and the RCMP. We have had other occasions when we have investigated the RCMP. The situation in this particular case was that we didn't need an MOU at all to go in to exercise our jurisdiction.
We had the jurisdiction to conduct this investigation. What we needed was support to get the resources and to get access to documents. That was the purpose of having Assistant Commissioner Gork in place. He was to facilitate that.
The other thing is that under the Police Services Act of Ontario right now, whenever the Ottawa police go to another Ontario jurisdiction to do an investigation, we expect to be compensated for our costs. We needed the MOU in this particular case because we anticipated that we were going to do an independent audit, a forensic audit, which would be very expensive. We knew there was going to be travel involved, and I was also concerned, in the very early days, that a number of improprieties were identified. Initially we thought this would be a three-month investigation, and I was concerned that the lead investigator, the inspector from our criminal investigative services who was assigned to lead this investigation, was going to be retired before it was completed and had ultimately gone through court.