Thank you very much.
Sir, very briefly, we've obviously set out our submissions on this and we do see it as an important issue, as I'm sure do you and everybody else, because a public inquiry, of course, is a public event, and as far as possible everybody wants to know what evidence is given to you.
If it is strictly necessary, of course, to derogate from that general principle, and no less restrictive option is available, then of course in those circumstances, a procedure has to be devised.
Sir, the matters obviously that concern us are certainly that if evidence is given, critical of a party or by a journalist or a third party, that there should be an opportunity to challenge that evidence and to put the other side. Otherwise, of course, the risk is obvious, that it will be given unchallenged and there will be a question as to what weight, if any, can be given to it. Therefore, one does need to divide a procedure which will allow, so far as possible, core participants to make representations to you in relation to each individual application, and that's what we have sought to do in the protocol which we have devised.