My comment is that I understand where Mr. Dosanjh is coming from, but that was the whole point of doing briefings: that in fact they were briefings. Obviously we can call witnesses, and that's what we were doing. We were calling witness after witness, which is the right and proper thing to do. We were getting testimony from people from the minister to the CDS and on down, and that's why we call witnesses.
This is a briefing. General Howard is not a witness per se, in my view. Questions are fine as they relate to the briefing, but I don't think it's appropriate that we treat General Howard as a witness and start getting into other areas that are not brought up as part of the briefing. That's why we call witnesses; that's why we've been doing so for the last several months. I think we're at cross-purposes here.