We want to be respectful. But there's a group of people on the Hill that haven't been specifically even identified in this discussion here, and by definition that would exclude others that could contribute just as well to us in prioritizing studies. To me, that's a problem. The process, if we follow down that road, is flawed.
I don't have any problem with us having our meeting as scheduled next time. We don't have to make any decisions there. We can talk about what kinds of witnesses we could bring forward to help inform studies that we should be undertaking, but I think we need a broad discussion. We've had lots of time to think about this. We have very much focused our discussions on the mandate letter that the Prime Minister issued to the Environment and Climate Change Minister. I assume others have as well and will be coming forward with proposed studies. I'm not in any way foreclosing an opportunity for key stakeholders across Canada, not just exclusively in that group, to speak to us and let us know what kinds of studies they feel are of an emergent nature, perhaps, and that we should be considering.