Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Committees are masters of their own destiny. If we get to the maximum number of hours and we feel like the topic hasn't been sufficiently canvassed, we can certainly entertain a motion to extend it. I think just providing the chair and the clerk with some parameters around expectations is a reasonable way to go. It's certainly what we do at other committees. In the case of our beloved study on rural postal service, I would note that the number of meetings was understood as a maximum. It's not an open-ended study like some of our other studies. I just think it puts the committee in the driver's seat.
I agree with my colleague Mr. Genuis that there are outstanding questions about how this program has been managed. I think Canadians are interested in obtaining answers to those questions. Whether those answers can be made available in 12 hours of testimony, I have absolutely no idea, Mr. Chair. I'm willing to explore it and see where we get in 12 hours. If we get to that point and there are unanswered questions and outstanding concerns, then absolutely, I'll support extending the study beyond that.