Thank you. Section E, dealing with impact, it should be stated that you provided the Inquiry on a confidential basis with a number of case studies. You point out in the middle of page 23 -- this is the part in bold type -- that each is confidential to the Inquiry, as each subject has expressed grave fears about further invasions of privacy and harassments by the press should it become known that their story is in our submission, and for that reason, after consideration, you decided not to publish the case studies or permit the Inquiry to do so, so that has not happened. But you do find some common themes, and these are the four bullet points which you list:
"In each case, the subject of the story had their right to privacy grossly breached, often at a very vulnerable time, with no public interest being served whatsoever.
"Was put in danger of public abuse and/or violence.
"Is left with candid details of their personal affairs, including previous names, pictures, home or work, available on the Internet.
"Often these details, including photographs, were acquired without the subject's permission.
"Had to fight the press to force them to exercise restraint -- often with no effect."
So those are the common themes which again we're not going to look at in detail for the reasons that you have given.
Page 26 now and section F, "Press and regulator response". Has the PCC in your view been supportive? We know that the Editors' Code of Practice Committee as you've told us has amended clause 12 to substitute "gender" for "sex" and the reason for doing that you have explained and there's also some guidance, so that might be said to indicate a measure of support.