The clerk has informed me that the notice would have been given yesterday, which would mean it would be in order for a Friday meeting. We'd be willing to discuss these after we deal with the witness lists. We could go to these motions, then, because two of them really don't relate to the softwood lumber agreement. Number three does and is therefore clearly in order.
The first one, Mr. Julian, is a motion this committee passed just a couple of weeks ago, word for word. It is exactly the same and was part of the motion that was tabled in the House. How can this committee deal with the same motion again, two weeks later? That's clearly not in order, but motion number two--