Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
I want to return now to the issues presented to us relative to a whistle-blower; namely, Witness 1's report to this committee for the purpose of our study.
In that testimony, which not all members of this committee were subject to, there were many serious and damning concerns worth this committee's investigation. Part of those concerns were serious issues related to racism, sexism, homophobia and real issues of systemic violence within SDTC. These are serious, and they require serious investigation.
We need to talk about this, how we speak about whistle-blowers and how we work with whistle-blowers. Just this morning, for example, we had the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner asking for more money because of the sheer volume of concerns related to the Liberal government and the serious issues within the public service. We do need to make more credible the real concerns of those who work in the public service when they come forward with concerns. It's a very legitimate and regular part of being a government. You should be able to investigate these with more serious concerns.
The McCarthy Tétrault report was rejected by the whistle-blower, Witness 1, as you may know. It was rejected because of the specific issue of NDAs. You mentioned that all confidentiality was waived.
Did that include non-disclosure agreements by SDTC employees, yes or no?