Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Two things. First of all, I want to make sure we're talking government. That was adopted as a friendly amendment. We don't need to discuss that. That would be my first point.
The second thing is I don't know that I'll argue with Ms. Saks, but I think we're both pretty new to the committee. I'm in meeting two. My real understanding of this issue, of course, came from what I saw in the press. There are outstanding questions clearly the public is looking at. Why did it take four and a half years? Why were the charges different? Why was the money different? To me, those are clearly some of the critical nubs of this issue that remain unanswered. Certainly, from my perspective, this is not a generic motion. It was a specific motion about a specific issue that did identify who we needed to talk to. Contrary to what Mr. Baker said, this is very different, when you have government departments and officials invited, as opposed to witnesses who we put forward.
I understand this is the last meeting and we haven't answered through today, which would have been what I would hope to do...some of those critical outstanding issues.
Thank you.