Well, I would be interested in what anyone else has to say, but I just wanted to say, with regard to the process, that once we get to dealing with the motion, we usually have a meeting—it can be one hour or whatever—to discuss scope of themes and how we do the work we do. The analysts would present some ideas to us on how we can fulfill some of the questions that you asked about, Mr. Anderson.
I think we cannot change what is in the motion, as you well know, unless we go back to the House. You've commented on systemic racism and religious discrimination. In order to change what is in this motion, agreed on by the House, we have to go back to the House and ask them to change it. I think that's going to take us God knows how long, and so, really, we are sort of stuck in this.
How we interpret it is up to the committee and up to the analyst giving us some advice on how he sees this flowing out. Then, we'll have a full discussion in this committee on what we see.
I think Mr. Vandal made an interesting insert here, which is, “using extended hours as necessary”.
It is not without precedent for committees to use extended hours in order to get their work done. We saw this happen when we had the question on the Safe Streets and Communities Act that was repealed. We saw that the committee met for seven hours to get it done in one sitting.
Sometimes, given that we have had, in this particular session, break weeks coming out of everywhere, we have really been held back in terms of getting our work done. Three-thirty means that either we have a vote before 3:30 or we're called in for a vote at five o'clock. We tend to not even do the two hours of our meetings, as we've been noticing in the last while, and that's why at the beginning I talked about extended hours.
I think we need to consider that we need to get the work done, and to get the work done we need to do what is necessary, which is to work at all kinds of new and interesting hours. Finance committee is doing this all the time. A lot of committees do it, based on what they're doing and their ability to proceed.
We have at least three studies on the table. We haven't had the 48 hours yet—I don't think—but Ms. Dabrusin sent us another study. We have museums from Mr. Van Loan. We have Mr. Vandal's motion on aboriginal sports. We have a lot of work to do if we intend to finish it, and, I might add, we have to finish our report on media and communities.
I have to tell you that there is not a day that goes by without somebody in the media calling and asking, “Is your report finished?” I think we really need to get our work done, and I just want to place that on the table in regard to your question, Mr. Anderson, about how we are going to fit this all in. We just have to make a decision that we have to fit it in.