Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just want to add a different point in relation to our going forward.
Mr. Genuis suggested that the analysts be asked to start preparing a report on Hong Kong. I would say that such an item is premature, keeping in mind that it's an interim report and we're probably only talking about things that might be important for the government to do or to recommend for today and that the larger questions may be left until the end.
Perhaps it has already been done—but maybe it didn't happen because of prorogation and the committee didn't exist—but perhaps we can ask if the analysts are able to provide, or work on at least, a summary of the evidence so that we can have something to review. Particularly, there are new members on the committee. I wouldn't want them to have to read through the entire transcripts of all of the meetings that we've had. I think that would be a bit onerous. Since we are bringing forth the evidence—the evidence is before us—if there were a summary of it from the analysts for the use of the full committee, that might make the process move along a little more quickly and smoothly.
Given the fact that there's a constituency week coming up, if that process were started now, that would at least save us a week of waiting or a week before we ask such a question. That's up to the chair and the committee to advise, of course. If that's compatible with the analysts' work schedule, then that would be great.