Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am not entirely sure I understand the question, but I will try and respond. I think you have asked what new ingredients or new aspects could the special committee, or could a special committee, bring to solve the issues that are presently floating out there.

One of the things that has occurred is the application made allegations of an apprehension of bias. We should be clear that apprehension of bias is a test that, not necessarily was the person actually biased in what they did, but would a reasonable person who was informed conclude that they brought some prejudgment or bias to their activities?

That particular issue has not been dealt with on the merits, so it has not been explored in terms of what evidence is there to support it or to controvert that particular allegation, so it remains as such. It remains an allegation. The committee did ascertain that to assist it in coming to that conclusion, it would have to hear from witnesses to get a better idea of what transpired and whether those actions, once they heard them from the mouths of individuals, not just something written in a legal brief, substantiated something or not, as the case may be. As the committee has indicated in its report, it was not able to get to that point, of determining the merits.