What I did first was to have the great researchers at the Library of Parliament give me a brief summary of what is done in Australia, New Zealand, and the British Isles, as in Great Britain and Westminster.
New Zealand and Australia effectively have a system like the one we have here. Committees are formed, the committees meet, and then it's yea or nay for whoever is put on.
The British—and this wasn't the only inspiration; the House of Commons debate on October 31, 2002 which I referred to was also inspiration—but the British, after their parliamentary expense scandal, decided to do a look at everything in the House of Commons. As one said, it was no use wasting a crisis; they may as well use it to put through some reform.
This is one of the suggestions they came up with. It's interesting that they've found it to be very positive and something they're quite happy with. All members and all parties there support it.
I will, however, state that I don't think we should look to the British and slavishly copy them. Their culture and their system are much different. We should look to them for inspiration and maybe some practical aspects on the mechanism.
Those are the primary sources of research I looked at.
Then, of course, I've been here 10 years. You haven't been here quite as long, but we actually have some opinions about how committees should run. That very much factored into this.