To second my colleague's point, I think it's really important as a committee—I mean, we don't need to hear.... I've been through this on the finance committee, and I defer to my colleague across the way, Mr. McTeague, who has been here since 1993. When we go through these procedures and we have the same presentations from different people but with the exact same message, it is no more effective than if they appear once and make the case properly in the first place.
I don't think we need to hear from dozens of people on the private copying levy. It just means we'll line up dozens of people who are going to say they don't want their iPod taxed.
It takes away from what we're actually trying to do, which is work on the copyright bill. I don't think we need to hear from people time and time again. I agree with what my colleague Mr. Lake has just said. I have met with a number of the folks requesting to appear as individuals, who are part of lobby groups on the Hill under the heading of ACTRA, or others—the Songwriters Association, for example. The recording industry has also brought people through who are now on the list as individuals. They are best represented by the association to which they belong or with which they have been lobbying.
Having the same message represented multiple times to the committee, I can tell you from the finance committee that after a while committee members tune it out. It is not effective at all; in fact, it is not a proper use of our time.
I would concur with what Mr. Angus has said with respect to the copyright collective and so forth. I'm happy to get them in early. We can get them in on the first day, in the first or second hour, however the chair sees fit to schedule it. But I would agree that we might as well get them in up front so we can have a good discussion about how things currently operate.
I'm happy to do that as soon as possible.