Again, I haven't heard anyone even make the allegation that Minister Toews has done anything wrong here or that he has failed either by commission or by omission. There's no evidence whatsoever of that, and there's not even any allegation of that.
The only reason he was included in the first place was because of the suggestion that the numerous contracts just under the limit might represent a violation of the rules and therefore he should have been enforcing the rules. That was the rationale for having him in the original motion. We've now removed that from our study and we've made the point that we can't criticized someone for almost exceeding a limit. So the President of the Treasury Board really has no link to this matter whatsoever, and therefore I would ask that he be removed.
On the other contract, related to the budget speech writing, regardless of what you think of that, the Minister of Finance has acknowledged that the administrative rules were not followed, and he has apologized for it. I'm not sure what more the President of the Treasury Board could do in that case.