Thank you, Mr. Chair.
André has obviously raised the issue of the time review and the timeline and the required witnesses. The clerk has indicated a motion that I made, which seems to me was at the beginning, about a timeline about what we were going to do and when it would end and that sort of thing. So that's not a new motion, which seems to indicate that it maybe was made last week or the week before.
We knew these timelines quite some time ago. We had witnesses call us today and say they were coming on June 11. That's what they said, Mr. Clerk. So whether they got the thing wrong or not, all I'm saying to you is that there are some folks out there who think they're being called after the fact. They don't know it's after the fact, but we certainly know it's after the fact because we passed this motion during the second meeting we had because we couldn't get the first one through. Mr. Anderson filibustered all night, so I didn't get the first motion through, and we compromised on that particular motion. That developed the timeline. Mr. Lemieux and I, with you, Mr. Chair, and Mr. Bellavance, worked that out.
So we didn't pass that last week or the week before. That got passed months ago. It got passed last fall. So to raise that as the issue now about some motion that just got passed and that affects the timeline is, to be honest, duplicitous at best. Come on, let's be serious here.
I'll leave that.
The other part is this. Did we get the information that I talked about the other night from the CFIA, which were specific questions that I asked of Mr. Cameron Prince, which were going to be here forthwith? That donkey made it a long time ago, and it must be dead by now if it's still carrying those papers.
Did we receive them? If we have, where are they? Are they out to translation or what are their whereabouts? Have we received the other documents that my motion spoke about? Depending on whether you say today or tomorrow, are we in possession of those or are they coming on the same donkey that carried the last ones?