Mr. Chair, I do appreciate your trying to bring order to this.
I want to reiterate that I don't think anybody is hostile to the fact that we're going to deal with this, but I am very unclear other than on a timeline. I would ask, through you to Mr. Preston, what he has in mind. It says a study is to be completed. This is somewhat different from providing the clarification that I understood the Chief Elector Officer was seeking. My question would be, are we then going to sit all week and have a series of witnesses who would come before this committee? I have no objection, but I'm looking for clarification.
I think it's been fairly clear in the media that members of Parliament--certainly the ones around this table and parties--don't view the interpretation that's been made as the correct one. I see Mr. Preston agreeing. We sat around and discussed the fact that photo ID was now required.
I'm trying to understand exactly what this vote means. Mr. Chair, when you say the committee will then decide how to prioritize this and the actual intention of Standing Order 106(4) that this meeting was convened under, how would we go about doing that?