Obviously, we met with the complainants to understand the nature of the allegations that were being made and to get as many details and facts as possible. As we mentioned in the report, we conducted interviews with some 34 current and former employees, so there would have been validating testimony of incidents or things that happened. But we cannot rely upon testimony alone, so we looked at things like e-mails, documents within the office, contemporaneous notes that substantiated the allegations. In the case where there was an allegation of reprisal and an allegation that personal information had been shared with other people, both within the public service and outside, we talked to those people--heads of former employers, a private securities consultant--to validate with them. There was evidence by e-mails as well. There was a fair bit of documentary evidence that supported the...and we had, of course, the interviews with the commissioner on two occasions, one that lasted a day and the second one that lasted two days.
On December 14th, 2010. See this statement in context.