I had to step away for a second, so I might have missed Mr. Savage's comments.
With regard to what Ms. Savoie said, here's my concern. When you asked why we couldn't do it as a separate motion or do it down the road later, first of all, as Ms. Yelich said, the information's already there. So this is not the part that's going to take the lion's share of the time.
The reason why not is that this is clearly a case of the Liberals wanting to release a specific set of information that they will then cherry-pick for political ammunition--clearly. I don't think anyone would have a question. Even they know they're going to do that.
So what I'm saying is, it has to come together. The information has to come together at the same time in the interest of fairness, of context. So I think it's common sense. I think it makes sense to do it the original way I said, two and two, so 2004 and 2005, 2006 and 2007. I think that probably makes the most sense. I want to be clear: this is an issue of principle. We can pass this in one minute and then we can go on to whatever else we're doing. But I will not let this die. This is not going to pass as is; it won't.