Not at all. I appreciate the honest question.
I think we tried to provide a proposed path early on in the testimony, respecting the fact—maybe just to differentiate from the business—that we are not necessarily here to be your advisers. We are here to answer questions. Ultimately, you have a team who provide you with advice.
If you were asking me for my proposed approach going forward, it would be for us to provide you with the index and file names, as I mentioned. I think there's a decision that needs to be made at that point: Does that need to be translated, or are the generic names of emails enough for the clerk of the committee or others to start to go through it? I think that's the first point.
Then, based on that, translated or not, the next piece would be for you to highlight the types of emails you would like or, for example—we can say where evidence originated from—that you're most interested in information from a certain province or from a certain organization. If you help us narrow it down, we could then go from 152,000 documents to 5,000 documents, let's say. Then we could work with our partners on expediting that translation, our reviews and that sort of thing.
That is very much what I would like to do and what I am trying to propose in the most appropriate way possible, understanding that we are witnesses here and that it is ultimately your decision what you will ask for. We very much want to find a solution, because I don't think any of us think the right solution is to spend years and years and not provide this in a timely manner. We want to provide you with everything you need to do the work in a timely manner, and in a translated fashion.