With respect to the adoption study, I don't think it needs to be long, but it needs to be fairly comprehensive and we need to do a good job, whatever it takes. Mr. Watson is pretty passionate about it, and we want to be sure that the areas of concern to him are covered and that we hear what we need to hear to come forward with a good report, whatever that means. However, it doesn't have to be a particularly long report in doing that.
Having said that, I speak with some trepidation, because I wouldn't want anyone to change their mind after hearing me speak, but I know I was opposed to having a subcommittee dealing with the issue of disabilities because I think it deserved the hearing of this larger committee. I know we did a study with a narrower perspective back in 2005. Mr. Martin was there, and I think I was and Madame Folco also. It was a worthwhile study, but it was fairly narrow in scope. This committee is coming to the end of what we've been doing in a major way, and it would be good to start another more major project, and certainly the area of disability would be a good one. I think it deserves the attention of the entire committee, as opposed to a subcommittee, so I would certainly be supporting it personally. I haven't talked to a whole lot to my colleagues as to where we stand on that, but it seems like a reasonable approach down the road.