By way of process, perhaps it's difficult to judge the narrative absent the possibility that there could be more recommendations. I, for one, am supportive of Mr. Angus' recommendations. Therefore, the narrative might be tweaked to make the recommendations fit. I think we might want to test the support for the recommendations first. The debate around the narrative might be redundant if we all support those recommendations.
Secondly, Mr. Chair, there are a number of footnote references in the narrative. I would suggest that perhaps the documents associated with those footnotes might be an appendix to the report, for ease of reference and to put quotes in context and so on.