Indeed, my understanding was that the issue of whether the ombudsman felt he had the consent of the complainant to share all or part—I don't know—of the information that he had was that there had been an initial conversation and that this was an ongoing process, which makes sense in the sense that I don't think it is right to think of survivors as having one moment to consent or not to do that.
I think that can be something where that answer is different at different times. That was my understanding of where that was at that time, so I want to really defer to the evidence you've heard directly from those players, but I think there was follow-up, and that was my understanding of what that follow-up was about.