Professor Ursula Kilkelly:

Yes. There was some dialogue at the time about how the sequence should be as set out in the terms of reference, but their preference was to finalise the report first. I understand why they wanted it that way. In hindsight, I should have insisted on it being done differently, as that would have better honoured the nature of the process. However, we are where we are.

The Deputy made a valid point about the balance of the public interest. We accept that, which is why we have grappled with this issue at 22 meetings of the board. No one wants to see this resolved more than us. We did not just get our own independent legal advice. Further separate legal advice and a review by the Attorney General of the matter determined the balance that was struck that we see today. The decision was not based solely on advice provided for the board but also on other sets of advice.