Mr. Leurer, can you address this issue in terms of, as I'll put it, the inadequacy of the reasons given by the government? In particular, if we're again trying to judge it through some neutral decision-maker based on the constitutional law and practice of this country, is the government's position even weaker because what they came back with is exactly the same position as they started with, as the commission sets out somewhere in their report? You didn't address it in your brief, but does it further weaken the government's position again in front of that imaginary independent tribunal?
On October 25th, 2006. See this statement in context.