Mr. Simon O'Brien:

I will take the last question first. This is nothing about feeling sorry after the event. The committee can see where this debate is taking us, exactly where I did not want it to go. We have legitimately investigated suspicions and threats that were turned up in a security sweep, a security sweep that had been planned for some time. It was based on risk management and risk assessment as things go forward. There were a number of aspects to why it was based on risks and why we did it at that time.

Let me take the committee back to the chronology. The Irish firm was contacted in June. That was at a period when we were far more public and high profile, a period where issues had been appearing in the media. It was a sensible way to take us forward, after quite a lengthy period of nearly 12 months when we had been quite silent on many things. I have a very clear view as to what was in my mind when I asked for the investigation to be launched under section 102. I also have a very clear mind as to what the discourse and discussion was in regard to why we engaged in a security sweep. The reason we engaged in a security sweep was that we had not had one for some time and now was a good time for that to happen, based on the fact our profile was becoming higher and the fact certain issues had been appearing in the press and we could not understand how they got there.