With your indulgence...and I'm asking for your indulgence because I really find this rather strange that we have the External Review Committee--i.e., independent External Review Committee--sitting there spending a million taxpayers' dollars a year, and in her opening comment she said the mandate of the committee is to review grievances, disciplinary, discharge and demotion cases referred to it by the RCMP, which of course turns out to be just the commissioner. And for anybody who gets turfed, fired, demoted, and sent off to the doghouse, she will not even listen to what they have to say, because she says it's not in her mandate, and will not even accept the fact that the law is totally unbalanced here.
I have one simple question, Mr. Chairman, because she mentions the 80% or 90% of the rulings the commissioner has agreed with. So my question would be, how many times in their ruling did the committee disagree with the commissioner so that he had to reverse himself, or did they basically, in 90% of the cases, rubber-stamp what the commissioner had already decided?