Well, you're entitled to disagree.
What I'm saying is that every organization is subject to the same frailties, I suppose, of human behaviour. The RCMP has had issues around abuse of power and authority. It's had issues around harassment. I've dealt with many of those in my 21 months as ethics adviser, but I was also a commanding officer of a division and an officer commanding a subdivision and an officer in charge of several branches. I can tell you, you can resolve issues very informally if you have good communication skills and a willingness to do that. I'm not convinced, in this particular instance, that the issues brought forward by Ms. Revine were dealt with in that fashion. In regard to the individual she was reporting—that being Mr. Crupi—and the irregularities, and so forth, she felt she was out there on her own, with the exception of Mr. Macaulay.
We shouldn't feel that way. If you feel that way in the environment you're working in, then, damn it, there's something the matter with the environment, there's something the matter with the individuals who are placed in positions of power, like Mr. Crupi. How did that come to pass? Why didn't anyone ever recognize the fact that the man was a tyrant? It came down to the fact he was marching to the drum of Mr. Ewanovich, who wanted to advance HR programs, and as a consequence of that they used whatever moneys were available. In this case, they took fence money from the pension fund and 2020, and used it to move forward certain programs. You can't tell me that Mr. Ewanovich was unaware of that. He had conversations with Mr. Crupi on a regular basis. Did the commissioner know? I'm not sure, but I know that I had conversations with the commissioner relative to that particular issue, the issue of behaviour as it related to both Crupi and Ewanovich. I can go into great detail, if you would like, on some of those conversations.
Did I answer your question?
