Mr. Chairman, in my experience, when you get too specific with regard to witnesses, not knowing whether they're available or in fact appropriate to the work done.... It's that this list should really be a little more generic and that people will be called as necessary, but it would appear that the objective of the motion is to ascertain Canada’s strategy for combatting tax evasion. That's a proactive--as opposed to historic--review.
I don't understand why the Honourable Don Johnston is here. I'm sure there are many people who have in the past had some matters...I think if the committee would accept to simply leave the OECD there.... It does say “witnesses, including”, but not limited to, and I think as we see the need.... Because I can see that this could take an awfully long time if we're going to stray too far from what I read to be the intent of the motion.
I would propose to simply leave it at “OECD” and drop the “former Secretary-General of the OECD”, which is sticking out there like a sore thumb as the only person specifically named here. The committee could find out the availability of the most appropriate officials from all of these agencies and then bring them back to the committee.