Thank you.
Thank you to Miriam and the staff, who have been coordinating back and forth in these demands for documents.
We still seem to find ourselves in a bit of a bind administratively. It looks like our timelines have two future deadlines, one of them to be met at some time in June, if I recall. I think June 14 was the date. Quite frankly, I don't know that there's going to be anything material from the evidence that would materially force us to deviate, recognizing the fact that, obviously, the federal decision is for the consideration and archives of the study, if you will.
Perhaps there might be some aspects of this that may alter how some of us voted on previous draft resolutions and recommendations for the report. However, we're now a good two years into this, and it would be my preference that at some point there's a consideration that we revisit the report-writing stage, with the caveat that we leave open, before the finalization of the recommendations in the report, a way to revisit, whether through straw votes or recorded votes, the outcomes of our draft reporting stage. Even by that metric, to be clear, we would be on course for reporting back sometime in the fall, if we're being frank. If we don't finalize the report-writing stage and wait until the June submission dates, assuming things are delivered, then the bulk of the work of translation will have been funded and completed. It would likely provide us the summertime, for members who are interested, to go through the tens of thousands of documents or what have you. I say that because if the index was several hundred pages, I can only imagine what the final requests will be like.
At some point in the fall, I hope we can begin a writing phase or work towards the completion of this committee, which, in my opinion as somebody who really pushed on the mandate and expanded visions of this, should begin to come to a close. I think it's irresponsible for us to pursue this committee in perpetuity.
I'm wondering if there are comments from our colleagues about our ability, perhaps over these next couple of weeks, to set aside a time within our meetings to revisit the report-writing stage, setting aside any finalization but working in parallel with the translations. I say that with respect to the work that's been done. I've been in support of the work. We're all in support of the translations of the work. However, given the deadlines we have right now, I think if we don't begin to open up a parallel track for consideration of the report-writing stage, we may see a scenario—notwithstanding the fact that we don't get back until late September—where we're pushing this potentially into the following year, and I have very little appetite to push this committee into the next calendar year.
Those are my statements. Hopefully, we can begin a discussion that provides us with some rational, practical consideration of ways that we can do the work of the report-writing stage, leave space open for translation and then at the end perhaps reflect upon anything that might come into conflict with new information as presented by members of the committee.