I do support relaunching the study on the oil sands and the water resources, which is the first paragraph. I do have concerns about the second paragraph and won't be supporting that, so in a moment I'll be moving an amendment to remove that.
We have specific names from different departments--a lot of specific names--but then for various industry representatives we have no names. As you presented, the norm is the norm. It's for this to be referred to the subcommittee to provide a witness list that the NDP is happy with. The NDP would be providing names, the Bloc would provide names of witnesses they would like to have, the Liberals, and then us. Everybody would have a chance to put witnesses, and then we would provide you and the clerk with names of witnesses and you would arrange who's available when, so we have time to provide the maximum number of witnesses. I'm uncomfortable with this portion of the motion.
The other point the motion doesn't include--and the first paragraph is very general--is what that study would look like. Again, the subcommittee needs to seriously discuss what this study would look like. Now, I'm not looking forward to going to Fort McMurray, particularly at this time of year, or any time of year--