Sir, my starting point is the ambit of the Inquiry, because it's from that and from your terms of reference that the self-denying ordinance that you've described seems to flow. We've addressed this in our submissions, which I'm not going to repeat -- I know you'll have read them -- in paragraphs 20 onwards, focusing on, if you like, the straitjacket imposed by the terms of reference and section 5(v) of the Inquiries Act.
The matter that concerned us was what you said on 12 March, when, in the context of warning letters under Rule 13, you said that the report must not include any explicit or significant criticism of a person unless they've been given a reasonable opportunity to respond. A little later, you said in another context that you were presently minded to the view that it didn't prevent you, the ongoing police investigation, from criticising an individual whom you did not suggest had actually participated in illegal conduct.
My submission is really this --