Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, and I want to thank Ms. McClymont for being present with us today to answer these important questions.
As you are aware, the concerns related to SDTC are largely twofold in the minds of Canadians. One thing is the fact that, of course, there was severe conflict of interest leading to severe levels of institutional mistrust. That's one barrier we're attempting to overcome here in this committee's report. We're trying to understand how conflicts of interest can take place and trying to reduce the likelihood of those conflicts happening. We heard from the Ethics Commissioner earlier this summer in relation to other files, on which we know room can be made to ensure that officers, whether they're appointed or not, doing the work we do in Parliament or on behalf of departments are actually followed through on correctly.
Part of the issue with SDTC, as noted by the Auditor General, was with the appointment process of the actual persons who sat there or at least with the oversight of those persons who would sit there. I understand that may not be the function of your office today, but it may be something worthy of consideration.
In order for me to best understand this, could you please describe again—I know you did at the beginning of your comments—the clarity that your office has or the Privy Council Office has in the appointment process for SDTC? How many members were they to recommend and what was the process for filling the remaining vacancies?