I quite agree with what my colleague Pablo has just said.
The idea behind that is that we want to do serious work and have the time to listen to what witnesses have to tell us in public. I know that we have all done our homework and met with many people in our offices, but those people have to be able to state publicly what they told us. Our questions and their answers need to be given in public.
There will also be groups that we have not yet heard from that will present briefs; we have to have time to read them. As for holding two two-hour meetings a week, it is indeed a good idea to split those meetings into two one-hour periods and not hear from more than three witnesses at a time. If not, things will become incomprehensible.
Mr. Chair, Madam Clerk, it is important that the witnesses who will appear come from the same sector or have a common interest, which would allow our questions and their answers to be more in-depth. This is not only about getting them to say publicly what they told us in private, this is about doing serious work so that we can receive explanations and properly understand such a complex bill, which contains a lot of ramifications, in order to then take an informed decision.