Sure.
I first want to clarify the motion, to be as clear as we can, because of what Mr. MacKinnon said regarding it being prescriptive.
It is prescriptive in the sense that we need to engage as quickly as possible and mobilize as quickly as possible in pre-budget consultations for a lot of voices in this country that have not at this point had the opportunity to weigh in with their thoughts on what should be in the budget. It's a simple fact. As in past committees, when you embark as a committee upon a particular subject matter, the minister typically is your first witness, and the government officials.
In response, as well, to Mr. Ouellette on inviting additional people, that won't naturally follow, because we will be seized with inviting and submitting lists of people who we think are important to hear from. As the mover of the motion, I don't think I'd be agreeable to adding other groups at this point, because that will follow immediately following the minister. We don't want to confuse the purpose of our first meeting, which is to hear from the minister and his officials. We don't want to add people into that. We want to hear specifically from them. They lead the way on this, and then the other groups follow. That might be the PBO immediately after or it might be others; it will be others, if we go down this road.
To the chair's comments about the minister's schedule, it's totally understandable. They're very busy and such, but we needed to get on with this yesterday. In my view, if the committee needs to reorganize its meeting schedule to accommodate the minister, I think the committee should do that. I think the committee should say, “We need the minister now and whatever the minister's schedule is, then we as a committee will attempt to accommodate him so that we can get on with our work.”