Chair, my only concern, the way I think the motion is being amended, if I hear it being amended, is that we'll deal with the question when we get in camera; we just won't do it right now. That leaves us the option of hearing the names and positions in camera, and leaving it at that. It gives us the option of bringing it public if we decide that's in the best interests.
My concern about not leaving an ability right now is that I would certainly like to have Mr. Tardi, and perhaps even the law clerk, present to ask them what the implications are of allowing testimony to be given when at no time anywhere does a witness have to acknowledge where that came from or who they're talking about. It just seems to me that at some point in natural justice there has to be an accounting that we've held this witness—not that we question his integrity, but that someone who may be damaged by all of this understands that we didn't just deal with a quote that came out of nowhere and accepted it as the truth, when we haven't accepted anything else without checking it.
All of that is to say that if the amendment is that we proceed now and the question of whether names are made public or not will be dealt with in camera at a future meeting, that certainly meets my needs.