Thank you to our witnesses. I think your testimony here today is very helpful.
There are perhaps some small, and I'm sure unintentional, misunderstandings between ourselves on the committee in terms of the pace at which the Minister of Canadian Heritage wants to get moving forward on a new museums policy. I know she is very keen on it. As a matter of fact, I dug up some testimony. When she was at committee, she responded to Mr. Angus:
...that is why I would suggest that we're undertaking a review of our approach and our program regarding museums. That is why I've also indicated that I really welcome the work you will be doing in your discussions
--that's referring to the committee, of course--
with the museums sector, just as in my discussions we hope we will be able to bring back some very good, valid information with some strong, firm recommendations.
I was also interested in Mr. McAvity's testimony today, in which he pointed out that the minister has asked him for further input before Christmas as she moves forward with her policy development. So if there has been some misunderstanding, that's unfortunate. Unfortunately, the opposition members of this committee have tied up the committee days between now and the Christmas parliamentary recess.
The government did make an irrevocable decision on the court challenges program. I understand the persons and organizations affected by that decision wanted to be heard on the record; that's absolutely their right, and I would support that, but we learned just on Monday of this week that the justice standing committee has already begun hearing the witnesses. I think it's an obviously redundant initiative that in spite of that, the opposition members of this heritage committee have decided to use up our future committee time hearing some of the same court witnesses. I note that they decided to use not one--