As I said, I am willing to entertain a subamendment to this. I can't make it myself because I made the amendment, but I think we are open to more witnesses. The thing is—maybe it's my personal thing; I don't know whether it's the party thing—I'd like to hear what we're going to hear from that cadre of witnesses, which probably will take the two meetings that we have right now, and then I'd like to make sure that we.... It can be an ongoing list. I don't want to close the list of witnesses either to the one we decided on today nor even to one maybe on July 19. I think it may be premature to close the list of witnesses.
We want to very clearly indicate that the committee may call more witnesses as required or wanted. If we want a date on it, I can live with July 19, but I just think we want to make sure that we hear from the government, the ambassadors and the Ukrainian Canadian Congress and then decide. We may decide that we have enough information, or we may decide that we want to do a different study after this.
There's been enough concern about the sanctions Ms. McPherson has raised that we may want to have a set of meetings on the effectiveness of sanctions in general. We may have to do a legislative or statutory review of the sanctioned regimes. We may want to have hearings about oil and gas dependency and the kinds of things that Mr. Chong has raised. We might want to do all of that. I'm not presupposing we don't want to do that, but let's hear about this. Let's deal with the issue of the permit that was issued to allow a refurbished turbine to return to Germany and get that out there.
At the end of that, I think we'll know more. That's what hearings are for. Then we'll make a decision on that. If you want it on July 19, I can live with it, but I just think it's premature because we just don't know what we want to do yet.