—from the counsel, and I think that's more appropriate in a public meeting.
I have a couple of questions, Mr. Tardi or Mr. Walsh, whoever wants to answer them. You've identified two basic procedures—well, there were basically three or four, including just to do nothing. But one would be a reference to the Office of the Attorney General or the Director of Public Prosecutions of the Province of Ontario, and of course you laid out the tests, which—At that point in time, it's outside our hands; it's his or her office.
But then the other test is to make a report to the House, with the possibility that the person be found in contempt of the House. In terms of the test for perjury, are we talking about the legal test of whether or not perjury has been committed? Is the test the same?