My understanding at all times was that the file was not closed. I appreciated, as I indicated in my opening statement, that there was a question of whether the complainant was going to consent to her participation or the sharing of her information in the following steps. I understood that was the question. That is something that can change over time, and I think in such cases it's probably not unusual that it may change at different times.
My sense of that was not that it meant the file was closed. It meant that there is an opportunity if any further information becomes available to make sure that the next steps are taken appropriately, and I certainly had an expectation, or at least a hope, that information—direct information from the complainant—would help make sure that this went into whatever the right process is to then assess it. I never had any reason to believe that was not what was occurring. I don't believe Mr. Wernick said the file was closed. I think the file was kept open but with that difficulty, which I think is also a real difficulty.