I've made my point, and I appreciate that.
The other issue, sir, having been a member of the subcommittee, is that we certainly agreed that the three witnesses who are in the fourth report be on a list, as were others—the Information Commissioner, someone from the ministry—and it was agreed that other names could be added at a later date. There's no question.
What I don't recall, sir, is that these particular witnesses appear today in this particular order. Our objection is not that these witnesses appear; I think these witnesses should appear. Our objection is that they're appearing in the wrong order, that the report should be first, the report should be given to the members of the committee so that we know what the report says. Secondly, the process should be explained to us, the process as to where applications under the Information Act go, by someone from the ministry--I think the committee agreed that someone from the ministry would come--and someone from the Information Commissioner's office, because that could ultimately go there, so that the committee—