Let me go back to the nature of an investigation, actually. You can't operate on speculation; you can only operate on the basis of empirical evidence, and that's what the two investigators and Mr. Tardif were engaged in. We spent an enormous amount of effort to try to find who did the things.
As I indicated early on, there was no evidence of criminal wrongdoing that came forward after the two months of work by the two principal investigators, both of whom are very seasoned investigators in national police forces. That is a lot of effort.
Secondly, I think the report does give people a much greater sense of what the timeline and sequence of events was relative to the various views and perspectives that were around at the time.
Thirdly, we're able to determine, to the best of our knowledge, what Ambassador Wilson may or may not have said—and Mr. Brodie.
So I actually think that for an area that was complex with a lot of unknowns at the time, the report has carried us forward.