Earlier this week I had a motion before this committee requesting information reports, and Mr. Williams invoked a very similar argument to Mr. Christopherson's argument today, in stating that we should be very careful and not necessarily name individuals, especially if there's potential criminality involved. Consequently, he suggested quite different amendments from what Mr. Christopherson was suggesting. Mr. Christopherson suggested that we go in camera to protect the innocent.
Mr. Williams made what he called friendly amendments to not even table reports dealing with pretty serious malfeasance, and potential malfeasance as well. So I think we should follow the logic Mr. Williams presented to this committee somewhat earlier this week, just a couple of days ago, and the suggestions of Mr. Christopherson that this particular report be discussed. As you said, perhaps we're not compelled to do so, but morally it would seem to be the right thing to do.
I just thought I'd make these comments and refresh Mr. Williams' memory of comments he made just two days past.