Thank you, Mr. Chair.
First of all, our government and our team fully support any type of study that brings clarity and transparency to any type of expenditure by any official. I would say that right off the bat. We welcome consideration of a broader scope when we do this study, number one.
Number two, the premise on which we started this meeting was to hear from our witnesses. We have witnesses here today and supplementary estimates (C) that we need to review. The premise that we agreed on to start the meeting, reversing the order of the committee business and starting with the officials here, was to be able to get to some questions.
I'd like to move a dilatory motion that we move this part of the debate—which I welcome very much—into the later part of the committee business. If we must have a discussion to make sure that part of the committee business is in camera or in public, I wouldn't have any problem with that. My request is that could we please move this part of the debate to the committee business?
Also, I am missing two colleagues who, based on the whip's instructions, were staying back to acknowledge one of our colleagues who has served Canada for over 14 years.
If the committee members would like to consider this dilatory motion to move the debate on this motion—which is in order by the way—to the committee business part of the meeting, then we could have a dialogue going back and forth on whether it should be held in public or in camera.
Thank you.