Thank you.
I've had the opportunity to interact with the commissioner enough to know probably what his answers are going to be. I don't think we're going to get much if there's an ongoing investigation. What I would propose—not to muddy this—is that I would like to see the spirit of the original motion reflected with the witness list.
I would like to open this up for discussion prior to moving a subamendment. I do believe that having Kirsten Poon and Stephen Anderson present would be helpful.
Mr. Chair, I would just ask you this question: What is the likelihood of our having the resources for a three-hour meeting? I don't think they should be with the commissioner. I think the commissioner should be stand-alone for a lot of reasons. I do think that they should be included, and I don't want them excluded. Having a professional politician and minister, Mr. Boissonnault, here for an hour and then having a professional bureaucrat and commissioner, Mr. von Finckenstein, here for an hour.... I'm not sure we're going to get much light.
I'm wondering what the resources are and what the possibility is of our having a third hour added to that. I'll just say this now: Given the choice between the commissioner and the new witnesses, I would take the new witnesses if we only have two hours. If we have three, then sure, we can invite the commissioner. I can already assure you of what he's going to say.