Despite what you're saying, the Auditor General noted, in his report, shortcomings in firearms maintenance and officer training. A percentage of officers weren't trained. All kinds of things strike me as worrisome.
Even in Quebec and Ontario, the RCMP had police forces—if I can call them that—that used practically no equipment, that weren't in compliance with the requirements. How come the Auditor General has to be the one to bring these things to light? Internally, do you carry out periodic self-assessments, anything that would allow you to be proactive rather than reactive? Do you have any internal processes in place to detect these kinds of issues, so you don't receive this type of feedback? I don't think I'd be too happy to receive this kind of criticism from the Auditor General. I have the utmost respect for him, but, at the end of the day, these observations could come from anyone.