All right. I'm going to discuss your department now, to be sure we're talking about the right thing.
Our committee requested a document that was prepared by Raymond Chabot Grant Thornton. Despite our request, however, we received a highly redacted version, and subsequently a slightly less redacted one. The reasons given for the redactions related to privacy, of course, and the confidentiality of third-party information.
I thought that amounted to avoidance. We have a very clear understanding of privacy requirements in this committee. In this case, however, that many reductions prevents me from understanding the situation. It seems to me there are less aggressive ways to anonymize reports while still allowing us understand them.
I'm not passing judgment and disregarding those concerns. I'm trying to understand what we're facing, but the report prevents me from understanding.