Sure.
The point relates to the substance of the overall idea that Mr. McCauley has put forward, including the amendment. If we go ahead and support the amendment, it means, in effect, that we support the motion and that is just out of bounds, as Mrs. Shanahan has said.
If we have our tax agency seen as leaking documents—and, in effect, this goes in that direction—it calls into question what that tax agency ultimately represents. It wouldn't be a leak officially, but, in effect, that's what you have when you have public servants being asked to submit to this committee the private documents of an organization. Whether it's a leak in the classic definition or not, the effect is the same.
What matters to me is outcome, and here it would be—