We can put it in the form of rebutting this or rebutting that. The simple fact is that Mr. Williams is a witness that the opposition wants, and that's fine. He is a former, five years past, associate deputy minister of materiel. It makes perfect sense to have the current associate deputy minister of materiel, who has been on the job for five years, here, back to back. That just makes perfect sense if we want to get the information that we should be getting, to draw whatever conclusion we want to draw. If we want to play other teams, that's another story, but clearly, the current ADM of materiel, with five years' experience, has a lot to offer. He was here previously, but as one part of a panel of about five or six people.
It's time now to drill down into some of the issues the opposition members have brought up, and that's fine. That's their right to do that, but if we are going to drill down into those issues with somebody with an opinion that is dated in fact, albeit dated, then we should be drilling down into the same material with the individual who is currently in the position and has been doing it for the past five years. That to me, Mr. Chair, is logical, fair, professional, and complete.