Thank you.
And thank you both for coming here.
With regard to the discussion that Mr. Proulx was having, following up on the earlier discussion we had about how Australia handles things and his comments on that, I don't think I'm wrong in assuming that if someone has given testimony in camera but has resisted the release of that testimony, but it's the judgment of the committee that the testimony ought to be heard, they could be compelled to give the testimony again in public.
Am I not correct that that could be done?