Yes. These paragraphs I'm attempting to explain, as asked in my Section 21, how co-operation has worked.
We opened our investigation, as we say, on the basis of full co-operation, and the MSC then conducted their own internal review of the Sun, which was not a request made by us, but they did it nevertheless.
As a result of that, they voluntary provided a lot of documentation, which evidenced suspected criminality and which led to a couple of individual arrests and then to very substantial arrest days, which were highly publicised. They were on 28 January this year and then again on 11 February, and involved the Sun newspaper.
Following that, those two arrest days, there was considerable adverse publicity of both the MPS, the police and the MSC, including threats of legal action against the MSC.
Following that, there was a change in the nature of the co-operation. We were being asked perhaps to justify our requests to a degree that we perhaps formerly hadn't been, and the material that we were requesting was slower in being forthcoming.
The MSC were obviously very conscious to protect legitimate journalistic sources, and of course the law places very strict restrictions on the police obtaining such material.
The comments are we started on the basis of full co-operation, so any change in that co-operation could adversely affect initial decisions that we'd made and arrests that were made as well. But I should stress that, despite challenges, quite correct and proper challenges, the co-operation continues and we have recently received a substantial amount of material.