It's somewhat challenging to address, in the sense that this implementation act deals with a whole range of issues that affect poverty. It's unusual I think, Chair, just because we haven't heard the witnesses' testimony yet, to know whether it's relevant or pertaining to the issues that are addressed by this committee.
It's an issue of precluding witnesses based on the organization they are attached to, simply because they are attached to that organization. I'm grasping for what Mr. Saxton's actual concern is.
Romero House is a Christian organization that deals with anti-poverty issues for new Canadians. I'm not sure if the budget implementation act or any of the acts in the sections we're dealing with have some concern for him, but it's difficult for me to argue witnesses' relevance to the case we're studying before we've heard their testimony.
I would suggest, Mr. Saxton, maybe we should wait to hear from the witnesses before you raise some objections, and we can deal with it as a committee then.