If we could look at tab 7 in annex 1. If we could see the first page of that document, please. "Forest concession review - phase III. Report of the Concession Review Committee, May 31, 2005. Acknowledgments". Then if we could look, please, at page 27 of the report. Then we see, the second bullet point:
"Out of the 47 concession holders submitting at least some data, not a single company presented a contract that was in full force and effect. Contracts were either not ratified, did not follow correct application procedures, were not submitted, had expired or manifested a combination of these deficiencies."
Then, Mr Taylor, it gives a list of various findings in relation to these concession holders, number (i) through number (vi). Then:
"15 companies were technically in compliance to the extent they had a contract before other contracts were issued in the area. All of those 15 concessions are overlapped by other concessions. There were some concessions that did not identify or illustrate the metes and bounds of their concession areas."
So, Mr Taylor, they found quite a few deficiencies. Isn't that correct?