Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Yes, I think it is a good idea that we hear from these people. As I said earlier today—or no, I can't quote what I said in a previous committee. These people have put testimony before the public accounts committee that has been contradicted by subsequent people before the public accounts committee; therefore, we need to have clarification of these differences in statements. Whether it's perjury or not, we don't know at this point in time. Is it contempt of Parliament? We don't know at this point in time. Therefore, it is important that we proceed and hear from these witnesses.
There have been other names put forward too, Mr. Chairman. I would start with the list put forward by Mr. Wrzesnewskyj and the other names we have agreed to, but I think it's more important that we not close it off; we may want to add other names. Therefore, in the interest of unity of this committee, I would suggest.... You may check with the clerk, because I'm not sure an open-ended list can be treated as a motion. I think if we all agree as a committee that we have these names, plus the others, and an open-ended list that we can add to, and adopt the motion, then we're all agreed.
It can't be a specific motion saying these people and anybody else; I don't think that's appropriate. But as a committee, we can say, let's start with these, then bring in the others, and leave it open-ended, and we go from there.