Mr. Brendan Gleeson:

Essentially, it seems to me, based on my examination of the matter, that the previous approval focused very much on the suitability of the premises and not on this test of what is a fit and proper person. Various professions have that test and it is not a simple thing. There is judicial precedent and there are professions that do not have that test.

One of the things we are doing in consultation with our lawyers is trying to figure out a protocol that will tell people what test they have to carry out for a person to be a fit and proper person. The kinds of considerations there might be is how do you handle a corporate application if one individual has been convicted? How do you handle a conviction five years ago or ten years ago? Is a conviction a purgatory in perpetuity? I am not sure it could be. How do you handle an ongoing investigation where you have a suspicion but no conviction?