--was that it would be difficult for Mr. Sparrow to be in front of this committee on May 11, so we are at somewhat of an impasse. They didn't want him to speak in the first instance, and then there were explanations that we didn't do our job properly in scheduling witnesses, and finally it was that it's just difficult, that it's hard for him to appear.
I told the clerk not to have any further negotiations with the chief of staff.
I'm going to suggest to the committee my assessment here. Mr. Sparrow is a vital witness to our work. There is no question about it. He's someone we have to hear from. We have no other witnesses. Mr. Dimitri Soudas is going to be here for one hour on May 11; then we're going to be getting into breaks and other things, and it's just going to drag on. I am not convinced that Mr. Sparrow, or at least the chief of staff, was totally forthright. I got the impression they did not want him to appear at all or to speak. The minister was going to do that.
I want to recommend, similar to the situation with Mr. Togneri, that if the committee would like to complete its work within the schedule we originally set out to complete the testimony by the 11th and start our work in regard to drafting a report, as required by the motion passed, we should also issue a subpoena for Mr. Sparrow to appear on the 11th. I would ask for the committee's input and consideration of that position.
Mr. Poilievre.