I have one suggestion that might work. I was finding myself thinking that there's so much connection between the two sets of witnesses today that we do need to hear the presentation from the folks from the CNSC. I'm wondering if we could keep the AECL folks at the table and members could then choose, because there are one or two follow-ups, but there are connections between. We've done this in committees before, when there's an obvious connection between sets of witnesses. Sometimes the answer doesn't exist within one group and you can turn to the other. It helps committee members, and I think witnesses as well, to understand.
I make that suggestion to the committee, to follow up Mr. Regan's suggestion.