I don't want to belabour this, because we have to get on with it. My only concern is that implicit in the motion is that it appears we thought Mr. von Finckenstein misled us. We're not sure what the answers are, so I would prefer to leave it open. He's coming here on May 25 and we can ask him any question we want then. To say he's coming back to answer that discrepancy, to me, raises a question that we at committee don't believe him. I have many questions to ask Mr. von Finckenstein.
I'll go with the will of the committee, but I'd prefer that we just leave it as is. He's coming, and if for some reason he doesn't want to come, then we can certainly have a strongly worded motion.