Thank you, Madam Chair.
It's a bit disappointing that we're having to do this today. I'm not content with the outcome of the report that Mr. Johnston provided to us. For me, the focus has always been on how serious this is and how important it is that Canadians trust their institutions. Here we are in this position again. I am sure, like many of the members in this place.... I have many important meetings that I am planning to do with constituents right after this meeting. I have had to move everything to accommodate them, so it's disappointing that we're here. It really outlines the reality that Canadians need to see a process that is transparent and clear and that they can have trust in, and this process is certainly not feeling to be that.
I have a couple of questions, Madam Chair, and then I will listen to my fellow members.
The first question I have is for the chair. Do we have a date or a tentative date for Mr. Johnston to come and be with the committee? I know you were working diligently on that. I think that is an important part of this conversation. The other aspect I am curious about is this: If we don't have a date, is there any indication of when he is proposing so that we can at least have that context in the conversation?
The second question I have is for the mover of the motions, and it just focuses on why we're going directly to a summons. I'm just curious whether I could have a bit of understanding. I know that I submitted a motion to have the special rapporteur come to speak to our committee. That was something I felt was really important as we address these issues of serious concern. I guess I am just trying to understand that process. Is there any indication, from either the chair or from the member who put forward this motion, that the special rapporteur is not willing to come to see us? I certainly hope that isn't the case.
I'll leave that to you, Madam Chair. Then if could you just add me on to the list whenever we are next, and I'll put up my hand.