Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I want to get back to what Mr. Christopherson was trying to address. On page 25 of the Auditor General's report, 5.111 states:
The 2015 External Review recommended creating an independent body outside of the Canadian Armed Forces that would be responsible for receiving reports of inappropriate sexual behaviour and act as a central authority for collecting information.
It goes on to say that the department created a sexual misconduct response centre and then it says, "the Centre was not given responsibility for receiving reports or collecting information", which is exactly what the external report had recommended.
Can we hear what the rationale was for not implementing what the review had suggested, given the further comments made by the Auditor General that there is a lack of internal oversight, that the data collection was not being done in a systematic way, that there was inconsistency because information was collected in different databases and that reports of incidents were sometimes duplicated because of those multiple systems? Can we get an answer to why that was set up in that way?