Thank you.
Well, I will always keep going back to how we used to do things on this committee, where we would lay out a whole bunch of possible narratives and then start to construct a plan. In these one-off motions, what we end up with is that whoever gets the motion in first, we can start setting the agenda. I'm concerned about that. I recognize that we're going in that direction.
I think the issue of the EU trade is a big deal, but it's also a big deal in light of the next motion we're going to deal with, which is ACTA. I'm concerned about us saying that we'll have one day on ACTA and one day on the EU.
I would prefer to start grouping some of these together, putting them into a slot when we'll actually start to look at them, because it's not just the issue of cultural diversity with the EU. There are issues of copyright and how international copyright will affect domestic copyright. We have a copyright bill before the House now that will have to be addressed. ACTA is definitely part of this. I mean, there were secret negotiations for the last two years and many concerns about how ACTA was going to play out. It appears that various players in the ACTA negotiations have split off. Now, are we dealing with WIPO 2010, or we are dealing with ACTA? We have the EU....
I would prefer to take those two as a group, rather than have one day, and hear from ministers and officials, and actually put this into the slot, but not now--perhaps beginning in the new year. We could bring in enough witnesses so that we actually can have a couple of days on what the implications are of ACTA and the EU. If there are going to be implications, what do we need to address, as opposed to simply saying we'll have a day and we'll hear it and move on? I don't think we're going to justice to it.
I'm not opposing the motion, but I'm saying that this and the next motion I think have to somehow be put together into a larger frame, and then we have to fit that into our agenda of what are our priorities.