Mr. John Field:

If I could clarify the process that happened in that regard because I would have reviewed that when the allegation was raised in 2012, there were two expense claims referenced in that allegation. It is referred to by Person A as allegation B. The first expense claim is the one the Deputy has outlined regarding flights to Sydney, and that expense claim was rejected at the time. The person was going on sabbatical and in line with all the other people who went on sabbatical at that time, as I mentioned already, the calculation of the expenses payable, which were round sum amounts, we calculated and paid to the individual as part of the second claim. When we reviewed the second claim in 2012 as part of the review of the allegations, we found that it was appropriately approved and the evidence was available on the claim that it had been appropriately approved.