Thank you, Mr. Chair.
The hope I had—actually, it's why I believe Mr. Housefather was suggesting a suspension—was to be able to see if we can talk among the parties to come to a resolution so that we can figure something out. I still feel very strongly, most strongly, that a charter review partway through is not a proper charter review. If we want to be able to get a useful and helpful charter review....
This is important. We're talking about freedom of expression. We want to make sure that the lawyers who are giving that advice have all of the best information so that they are able to do it right. I think that's the most important piece to all of this, so I would suggest that we take some time—we have until Friday—to talk among the parties and see if we can reach a resolution.
It seems as though we all fundamentally agree that we would like a charter review on this question of freedom of expression and that we would like that certainty going forward. The question is about what full information we need to get to the lawyers to be able to get that, and how we do it in a way that no longer delays what we're trying to do. How do we manage to get those points covered?
I would suggest that the best option for us now is to adjourn. I'm not bringing it as a dilatory motion; I'm just proposing that we do that so that we can have a conversation among the parties and work together, as I'm sure we all want to, and get to the best result on this one.