Thanks, John.
I'm a member of the Canada-China committee, and we started this study last night. When Michael Chong did bring the motion to us, it received unanimous support, ultimately. The rationale was, one, a claim of delay in acting on national security considerations. Two, there was a concern around access to documents in a timely and fulsome fashion. Both of those matters are within the ambit of the study that we have already undertaken at the Canada-China committee.
We heard from Minister Holland last night. We heard from the director of CSIS last night. We heard from PHAC last night. We have witnesses scheduled for this Friday. We're doing two meetings a week.
Look, I'm just visiting today. You do what you do, but I would caution against just duplicating things that we're already doing at the Canada-China committee. If you are going to pass a study like this, make sure you're working hand in hand so that you don't have the same witnesses, you're not hearing the same evidence, you're not duplicating efforts for no reason whatsoever and you're not just spinning your wheels and wasting your time.
Again, do what you want to do, but if you do pass this motion, make sure there's co-operation between the chairs of both committees. Otherwise, we're all wasting our time here.