Thank you for the debate. It's not a point of order.
Mr. Martin, I do understand your point, and the chair shares some of that concern. But it would appear that in the opening statement Mr. Schreiber indicated he has not seen his documents at all. He has been advised. I take him at his word that he would feel more comfortable to answer the questions of this committee if he knew the nature of the questions.
I'm advised that even Mr. Auger is not even familiar with our proceedings here and probably would not be in a position to properly advise his client at this time. We're going to spend some time with you, Mr. Auger, to make sure that this does not repeat.
I think the purpose of the exercise right now is for Mr. Schreiber to be apprised specifically of the questions that members are posing, and we take it that you will be coming back to the next meeting prepared to answer these questions as they are presented to you. We will provide you a transcript so that you will clearly know the area of the answer. It may help the next meeting to go much more quickly. But please take under advisement that if there is any question that is fairly benign, it would be nice to hear an answer of yes or no, if that's applicable, if you can. We will take you at your word, if you need to withhold until you get your books. Okay?