Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I agree this is an important issue and certainly relevant to the riding I represent and worthy of study.
My concern is that if we add up all of the meetings from the motions that have been brought before us, a total of 42 meetings have been proposed. From the conversation so far, it seems that we are adding, not subtracting. That would take us through to November without any room for estimates or legislation, which, of course, are going to require us to focus elsewhere.
As important as these issues are, my thought is that we should consider how many meetings we want to spend on each topic, because other issues are going to arise that require the committee's time, and spending eight meetings talking about this one issue, while it's important, is going to come at the cost of dealing with the other issues.
We could maybe talk about prioritization. We could look at these motions and simply not move forward with some of them. Certainly, some I think are a higher priority than others or we could have a more focused approach, which would meant that we would be able to deal with more topics as a committee.
Perhaps slightly contrary to my friend, Mr. Rogers, I was going to propose that we limit it to four meetings as opposed to six.