Some allegations were made by the whistle-blower—and we've asked for documentation—that somehow the minister had concocted the conclusions of that report. Even though it did not directly report to the minister but to another department, obviously when issues arise with an arm's-length organization or the department itself, it is reasonable that a particular report would be reporting to another department.
The board didn't have access to those documents before the McCarthy review at all, and you've just testified that you saw that for the first time two weeks ago. Is that correct?