I understand. I'll quote from the Speaker's ruling. It says:
On June 4, 2021, the president of the agency—
I take it that was you.
—wrote to the Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel informing him that the documents sent to him had been redacted because the order of the House did not offer the appropriate guarantees for protecting information related to national security and personal information. He added that the agency was co-operating with the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians....
The very argument you're making today, sir, you made to the Speaker prior to the Speaker's ruling yesterday. Is that not the case?