Then they would. Okay.
Let me ask you about another of the suggestions you have with respect to whistle-blowers. You are suggesting that all information with respect to whistle-blowers be subject to ATI.
I'd like to get your comments on why you disagree with one of the exemptions we have. If an investigation into a frivolous or spurious charge laid under the whistle-blowers portion of the act concluded there was absolutely no substance, no basis of truth, to the allegation, we are suggesting that the allegations and the name of the innocent individual involved in this.... In other words, if an allegation had been made against an individual that he or she had done something wrong, and an investigation concluded that there was absolutely no wrongdoing, we are contending--since it was a frivolous allegation to begin with, or at least a baseless allegation--that the the allegation and the name of the whistle-blower should not be made public.
You are contending that all those allegations--no matter how frivolous, no matter how baseless--should be released. Is that correct? Am I accurately reflecting your position?