Thank you very much.
There are a couple of things. One is that I am hoping the committee might consider the option, if it is indeed an option—I'll look to the clerk for some guidance on that—of having our normal meeting times during the upcoming break week, which I think is not next week, but the following week. That would provide an extra four hours for us to be able to undertake what Mr. Doherty is proposing.
I note that if we were to spend one hour instead of two hours on each of paragraphs (c) and (d), it would actually allow us to do those things in the break week and leave some time without holding any evening meetings—which I am not opposed to, incidentally. I think we have a lot of work before us and that it's really important that we table an informative and helpful report in the House by the deadline we set in the motion establishing this study.
I also note that the government has tabled its report on prorogation today, which is certainly of interest to me, and I expect will be of interest to many other members of the committee. That is also going to have take time.
I definitely think, if it's possible, that we should be looking to schedule at least our normal meetings during the break week. I'd be happy to try to use more of that time during that week, as opposed to doing things in the evening, if it's possible. But if it's not, then I'm open to having meetings in the evening. If we could tighten up the timeline for what's covered in this motion, it would help create more time for the study we just worked on today, as well as create some time to consider the report on prorogation prior to our adjournment in December.