Well, it could be added as a separate paragraph. I'm just saying that in the body of Mr. Cappe's testimony, there was some information he presented at committee that is not included here. It was in response to a question I had asked, and it basically said that our government had provided information that flowed out of the cabinet documents. In other words, we didn't breach cabinet confidence because we didn't produce cabinet documents, but we produced information that flowed out of those documents, which was first tabled in the House back in February. Mr. Cappe responded to that--and I'm going to quote here:
but I would say that the approach you have described is correct: you don't reveal a cabinet confidence, but the information that was presented and that went into the decision-making is now relevant to Parliament and should be disclosed. We heard both the Minister of Justice and the Minister of Public Safety say that the binders do not contain cabinet confidences, but they do contain the information you need. I'm not passing judgment on whether that's the right information, but that's what they said, and I think that's the right approach.
I think that's relevant to the discussion we certainly had, and it's obviously factual since Mr. Cappe is quoted here, and I think it should be included in the report.