Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I'm sorry, but I must disagree with the comments made by my government colleagues.
First of all, we used up the entire two hours the last time, when we actually needed to continue. We had agreed that, if there was a need, we would hold additional meetings. I can still recall the comments made then by certain members, who seem to be moving in another direction today.
Why am I so intent on bringing back all these witnesses, Mr. Chairman? Well, it's quite simple: you only had to be at last Tuesday's committee meeting to understand. An official from one department said he was sorry that he couldn't answer because the Treasury Board Secretariat was responsible for that particular matter. The other one said he couldn't answer because Public Works and Government Services Canada was responsible for that particular aspect.
So, if we don't bring them all back, they will again say they're sorry but they can't answer. One will say that it's a third department that's responsible. Another will say that he can't answer either, because it's the second department that's responsible for one part of the question asked.
That's why I say we have to bring them all back again.
If the meeting on Tuesday had not turned out the way it did and everyone had answered the questions when we asked them, I would have been happy and we could simply have had one department appear at a time.
But that is not what happened. I remember that, at one point, the official with the Department of National Defence was asking the official from the Treasury Board Secretariat what the policy was regarding something that was his responsibility. I don't want to be given half answers once again.
My point was clear: the idea is for us to be more productive.