The only comment I was going to make--and it is similar to what's already been made--is that I think this would be a much more acceptable motion if we could put something in there to explicitly state that for economic or security reasons, certain documents could be omitted, or portions of certain documents could be omitted, because the point Mrs. Gallant made was very valid.
I'm interested in seeing some of these documents too, but I don't want to see something that Westinghouse or GE then uses against AECL, or that goes into a training kit for terrorists when they want to do something someday.
I know these are abstract, theoretical points, because we don't know what's in there, but if we could put something--and similar views have already been noted--in the remarks about flexibility, if we could have a friendly amendment or something like that, it would make this much more palatable.