I'm the director general of the adjudicative services branch, which is comprised of four directorates. The first is the discipline adjudicators directorate where we have four full-time adjudicators who deal with discipline cases and they have a support staff in the form of a registrar and some clerical assistance and editing.
The other directorate is the appropriate officers representative directorate. Essentially it is the equivalent of what we would call prosecutors, I guess. They handle the presentation of formal discipline cases on behalf of the appropriate officer who is typically the commanding officer of a division. There is also the member representative directorate, which is essentially comprised of defence counsel who are acting on behalf of members who have been alleged to have engaged in misconduct that has led to formal proceedings being instituted against them. Then, as an aside, there is the grievance adjudications directorate, which has the grievance adjudicators assigned to it who deal with level one and some level two grievance adjudications.
My role as director—and this flows partly out of reports that have come in to the Pay Council, also known as the Lordon report. There was a desire to start to decentralize some aspects of the adjudicative services process, or the discipline process, and at the same time leave other components at the front end. This is attempting to build a framework. Obviously, conflicting interests are involved with defence, the crown, and the adjudicators or decision-makers. My role essentially is to coordinate those activities, bearing in mind the conflicts of interest that arise among these different groups and deal with budget matters and other general issues dealing with delivery of the services in that context.
We're national. We have offices in different areas of the country, in all the directorates.