Yes, and they've made that choice. So it's to buttress my argument that we should have him here on the motion that I put forward, for reasons aforementioned. And you're quite right to have him on the estimates, which now have gone to another process, another forum, and that would be the House.
I was going to suggest that at some point, if we have the motion here, we could factor a way or have a compromise so that we could have time for both.
I don't believe that what I'm referring to in my motion would take a long time. The estimates now are going to another forum, and that would be in the House. I'm simply wanting to have the minister here for the reasons I mentioned, which I think are important reasons. It's a matter of holding the minister and the government to account, and that's part of our job.