Alistair Webster informed Lord Rennard on 15 January 2014 that the decision was "No Further Action", and that the party statement that day was "not his responsibility." Webster's public statement on his conclusions from his report stated that there was "broadly credible" evidence of "behaviour which violated the personal space and autonomy of the complainants." The question of the standard of proof required did not arise as the evidence was insufficient to hold a disciplinary hearing - except that Webster did consider this question, noting in his statement that "my task was to review the evidence which I received and consider whether there was a greater than 50% chance that such a charge could be proved to the standard required by the rules, i.e. proof beyond reasonable doubt criminal, rather than civil standard of proof ... My view, judging the evidence as a whole, is that there is a less than 50% chance that a charge against Lord Rennard could be proved to the requisite standard". Webster concluded that it was "unlikely that it could be established beyond reasonable doubt that Lord Rennard had intended to act in an indecent or sexually inappropriate way" and that "I have specifically discounted suggestions made during the investigation that the incidents had been invented as part of a political campaign against Lord Rennard. In my view Lord Rennard ought to reflect upon the effect that his behaviour has had and the distress which it caused and that an apology would be appropriate, as would a commitment to change his behaviour in future".