I don't see anybody else raising their hand, so if I can jump in here, I have some logistical things to discuss.
First of all, this is an issue with regard to procedure. The first sentence is a preamble. The beginning of the motion would be the second sentence. You would need to either eliminate that first sentence or actually put it at the end, which is fine; however, the direction to the committee is where the motion should start.
Second, and more important, the clerk actually reached out to the ombudsman, anticipating the motions that are before us today. I have some notes. On supplementary estimates (B), the earliest date the minister is available to appear is March 10 or March 12, which is after the break week. On the first study in the report, the ombudsman is not available to appear this Thursday, which is what we had actually considered for the report anyway. The earliest available date is March 26. We're going to be calling back to get clarification on that, as we understand he is not available until March 26.
Obviously, that is a concern, given that this is the key witness you want to have appear. As has been stated, we do have officials coming on Thursday. We have two hours. Originally, we were going to see the minister for an hour, and the department officials for an hour. I'm wondering if we can break that up. We're not going to have the minister. We can either have the full two hours for the original study at hand, or we could break it up and have the hour exclusively regarding this study with officials, and then go into the second one. In any case, I know we're not going to have the ombudsman on Thursday.
We have Mr. Lloyd, and then Mr. Ruff.