Jack may say it's not point and counterpoint, but in fact with Alan Williams it is. Alan Williams has a particular viewpoint and a particular agenda. If we're going to get Alan Williams for an hour and a half...we have not had the man who, for the last five years, has been responsible for military procurement, which is Dan Ross. We had him as part of another panel and his part was pretty small.
In the interest of balance and fairness, if we're going to get Alan Williams for an hour and a half, then we need to bring Dan Ross back, because it is very much point and counterpoint. The philosophy and practice of procurement under Alan Williams was pretty much 180 degrees out from the practice of Dan Ross, and that was under both governments.
So it's not an issue of Liberals and Conservatives; it's a matter of procurement practice and why did it change? People can have their own opinions about which one is better or not, that's fine, but if we're going to get one side for an hour and a half, then we need the man who's been doing it for the last five years, who I would argue is a little more current, for longer than as part of a previous panel.