Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I want to go in the same direction, if you will. I can infer from the comments that Mr. Abbott has made that the minister has pretty well decided not to use the committee of the House to have the mandate of the CBC reviewed; otherwise, she wouldn't be concerned about the makeup of that committee. I respect the prerogative of a government to initiate reviews as it sees fit, but that's not the issue here.
If the minister is serious about involving the committee, I would have to go along with Mr. Angus and seek an amendment to what you're proposing, Mr. Abbott, that offers the committee an opportunity to review and comment on the terms of reference of whatever vehicle the minister chooses from the five options she's considering. If the government was serious about involving this committee, then the terms of reference of whatever mechanism is chosen to review the mandate of the CBC might be much more acceptable from where we're sitting.
To review the draft report in public is an interesting proposal, because even this committee doesn't review its draft reports in public. I was wondering if you could be a little more explicit as to what you have in mind there. If there is an offer to review a draft report and comment on it, I would presume that it should be in camera. The confidentiality of these reports, since they are only draft, should be respected, as we've respected the draft reports of this committee when they've been reviewed in camera.