Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
I have a couple of things. If this list is what we've already discussed—and from looking at it, I believe it is—I am fine with it, but I will be bringing a motion that we go in camera to discuss any new witnesses. There will be a discussion that I don't think should be made public about whether we should or should not call specific individuals as witnesses here, and there's the fact that maybe we'll be challenging or discussing their credentials and things like that. I don't think there's a different list from what we have now, which we've discussed over the last six weeks. In that case, I'm fine.
There are issues with who represents the Parliamentary Protective Service. The Usher of the Black Rod is actually not responsible for security in the Senate. Julie Lacroix, who is departmental security, is, unlike the Sergeant-at-Arms in the House of Commons, so it's the wrong person.
I would make a suggestion that for group number three, we finish the session with people who work on the Hill, because we're going to have bells and such. We could have the OPP and the OPS the week before.
As long as we're not adding anyone new, I'm okay with our dealing with these ones. However, I would like to flip groups three and four, mostly because having people come from Orillia with the Ontario Provincial Police to sit outside for three hours while the Senate probably deals with bells is.... We may not get to them. It would be unfair, and it's probably important that we hear from them before we break for the summer session.