Mr. Chair, there's an imbroglio at the PMPRB that involves the minister. Two letters of resignation have been received. I think we need to stick to that. At the first meeting, we will hear the testimony from these people. If, in light of their testimony, we feel that we should have other witnesses appear, we can do that afterwards. It's still possible, as the notice of motion states: “in addition to any further witnesses the committee may consider relevant”.
However, I repeat that Mr. Clark was not at the PMPRB at the time of the events. If we consider it relevant to have additional clarification, and perhaps even receive other witnesses, we can do so afterwards. However, for the time being, I would simply like to briefly review the history of the two people who resigned and the minister's intervention. That's why I feel it would be most appropriate to proceed in this manner. It would allow for a second meeting if we needed one to reach our conclusions.
That's why I am proposing this amendment. I had already spoken about it with Mr. Davies. He may oppose it, but my intent to present it was very clear, and I thought it was already in the amendment. I had not understood that this was not the case.