Mostly, Mr. Christopherson. That's why I miss this committee sometimes.
I think the point of the motion is just to have more information, which is perfectly reasonable. My experience on other committees—I sit on the Standing Committee on Finance—is that more information, especially for committee members, is always useful, especially for those of us on the opposition side. It helps us figure out better recommendations that we can try to input into the committee report. At the end of the day, the committee report is tabled for members of the House of Commons to consider, including the minister, who in this case is a member of the House of Commons, but not solely in the relevant duties that she has. Our purpose is always to try to influence the government through our recommendations and to improve the decisions in the legislation it proposes.
My experience has been, so far, especially on pre-budget consultations, that the government tends not to listen always to all the great ideas that we have and include in our reports. This sometimes seems odd because the government caucus members have a majority, so I would think they would be able to discuss it with their relevant ministers. That just goes to show that there are sometimes differences of opinion among caucus members on what should be done.
To a point that Mr. Christopherson made, he doesn't know what I think on this particular issue, and I don't even know what I will think on this particular issue yet, until I see what this committee has determined to be the right set of recommendations to suggest to the House of Commons.
I don't believe the committee will be able to do this issue justice unless it has all the information available that the minister has, if it is to provide her with the best recommendations. Just as Mr. Richards said, we're only talking about a few extra days, not that many sitting days of the House, that we would have to wait in order to get this information. That's not delay; that's just careful deliberation. You also have an entire session that we could complete, and you have many opportunities to meet. This committee is master of its own domain. You could choose to sit more often. Evenings, I've heard, have been used in the past; early mornings as well, especially by this committee. Then you could provide a fulsome report to the House of Commons on what we believe are the best recommendations for the House of Commons to consider on this particular issue, and then the minister would have them. You can hold as many meetings as you wish for careful consideration of this.
Delay is not an excuse, and this motion is not delaying the committee. It is simply calling for full information to inform the committee's deliberations on an issue for its recommendations. I don't see the problem with having more information. It's an issue of transparency. After all, the minister runs a portfolio, not gifted, but set upon her by the Prime Minister, with the Governor General's acquiescence, and the content of her duties are really up to us to determine and to hold her accountable for.
We also shouldn't only be holding her accountable for task set in her mandate letter, based on the Prime Minister's view of her job, but also upon the recommendations this committee provides on particular issues, and seeing whether those are taken up in the report, including any potential dissenting reports, maybe. You probably saw a dissenting report being tabled today from the heritage committee. That can also happen.
I'm just suggesting there are good ideas, including potential consultations that are now undertaken by the Minister of Democratic Institutions, that you may want to avail yourselves of in order to know everything there is to know on a particular issue, so you're not in a situation where you're suggesting things on which the minister has heard opposite views, which might be well informed, by an expert or a group of Canadians who have thoughtful recommendations for the minister.
Those are just my words. As I said, I don't want to belabour the point. I've done that already on this committee.
It feels as if there's been way more than the number of meetings, Mr. Chair, that you have mentioned, but I'll leave it at that and look forward to the rest of the debate on this.