It all ties together, whether it's the amendment or not, Mr. Chair. I would point out, though, in regard to Brian's comments on Ms. Weatherill, that we've seen this time and time again when we question the structure of the investigation. We're not questioning the credibility of Ms. Weatherill. It wouldn't matter if it was Jean Chrétien doing the inquiry; when he knocks on the door of the Minister of Agriculture, we don't want the Minister of Agriculture to hide. We want an inquiry that has authority; that's the point.
On this committee I think our intent is basically to have the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food do the hearing and to allow, as the clerk said, some health committee members who are associate members of this committee or made associate members of this committee to be subbed in, some people who have some expertise. I know Brian has an amendment, but I'm wondering if we could drop the whole business of a subcommittee of this committee and just make the motion that the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food establish a study on food safety and that it be authorized to hold extra meetings in order to deal with the issue.
I'm not moving an amendment, Mr. Chair, I'm just wondering if that would get us out of the difficulty we're in. We know we're scheduled to have two meetings a week, but if we just establish this committee, drop the whole subcommittee business on the understanding that we can sub in associate members who would likely have expertise on the health side from the various parties, then we don't have to worry about any of the rest, but we would need authorization and the understanding that the committee would hold extra hearings. There's you as chair, if you couldn't attend some of those, then there are vice-chairs, whatever, and we have no problem with the government chairing the hearings.