I'd simply like us to agree on certain things beforehand.
When the motion was drafted as part of the negotiations with our respective leaders, even though it wasn't specified in the text of the motion, I had understood that there was a gentlemen's agreement of sorts whereby the committee would devote 16 hours to hearing from witnesses before moving on to the clause-by-clause study stage. Of course, that's not counting organization meetings at which technical matters are discussed.
I don't wish to harp on procedure, but as I see it, if I discount the organization meeting and tally the hours that we will be devoting to witnesses when we return, that is the three two-hour meetings planned, that gives us a total of 11 hours devoted to witnesses.
As I see it, we should hear from a minimum of four, not three, witnesses per meeting. On occasion, the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights has even managed to squeeze in five witnesses. I must admit that it does seem we would be moving fairly quickly if we vote on a bill after devoting only 11 hours to testimony from witnesses. First, let's try to see what kind of information we need.
I would ask the committee to invite four witnesses to testify at each meeting. That's not so unusual. I will check with my leader and ask my Liberal colleagues and Mr. Comartin to do likewise, but it was my understanding that we had an agreement, not officially stated in the motion, to hear from witnesses for a total of 16 hours before proceeding to the clause-by-clause study stage.