Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Certainly, members around the table are very well aware of my feelings about arbitrary meetings in non-sitting times. I would caveat it by saying that this isn't arbitrary, given the fact that Ms. Poon herself volunteered to be here on the 15th.
Notwithstanding the fact that we have to respect that, I would ask you this, Mr. Chair. I see that you're getting some direction from the clerk, but I'm unclear, on the escalation of inviting witnesses, that a summons is particularly necessary. I know it fits a certain dramatic theme in communications, but given that they have not put in writing, or we have not received in writing, a refusal, but are volunteering to come here, I think the language of a summons, although it may suit certain communication styles, isn't necessary.
I'm wondering, through you, Mr. Chair, to the mover of the motion, what the intention is of using the language of a summons. I'll say on the record that I believe we have the power to summons anybody, but I think it's a professional courtesy, in working with witnesses, to find an available time and escalate in a manner that is consistent with their agreement to participate. This witness has not refused to come to committee.
I'm wondering if the mover of the motion would be open to and consider just removing the term “summons” and continue with the language “invite” until such time as the witness decides they're going to send us, in writing, a refusal.