I think that is it.
Mr. Davies, the problem with adopting the calendar as presented is that there are a couple of options further down, where we see “COVID or “children's health”.
I think what Mr. Barrett put forward would certainly make it crystal clear what we're going to be doing for the next three meetings, without a doubt. Once you get past that, when you get to May 4, you see an “or” in there. If we were to only do children's health, there would be a chance that we could present the children's health report in June.
I'm not hearing any appetite to stop hearing about COVID. The only question is whether it's 50% of the time or less. I guess my view is that if we adopt the calendar as is, that still merits further discussion as to how much of our future business is on which side of that “or”? Is it COVID, or is it children's health?
I think Mr. Barrett's suggestion certainly gives us clarity as to the next three meetings.
With that, we have a speakers list.
Did you want to respond to that, Mr. Davies, before I go back to the list?