What I am hearing, Mr. Chair, is that everyone seems to be in agreement on the process and the importance that we must attach to this matter.
Mr. Wallace was talking about the banks, but he did not talk about other financial institutions. But when we are talking about “the Canadian financial sector” that is rather broad. I think that what counts here is the choice of witnesses that we invite to the committee. As Mr. Menzies said, it would be fine to add specific institutions such as the Business Development Bank.
As for the number of meetings required, we have to do a serious job of this study, but at the same time, we must not spend too much time on it. One of the objectives of these meetings is to allow people to see that there is a parliamentary committee that is looking at the issues that everyone is concerned about.
Another objective is to bring the topic down to the layman's level so that the general public can understand how the provisions in the budget will have an impact on their lives. We want them to understand what the support that the government is giving to institutions means, and how the government intends to protect the taxpayers' interests. So if we want to reach that goal as well, it must not be to long. We could add two meetings, but I think that we should not go beyond that, because then it would become too long. I think that approximately ten meetings would be sufficient, rather than eight, since we are casting our nets somewhat wider. That is what I would suggest.