First, let me in turn thank the analysts for the documents they provide to us. They inspire us and they will guide us. I learn a lot from them myself.
Before us, we have a list of suggested names. However, we also have given ourselves until March 20 for each party to be able to submit suggestions for witnesses. I imagine that each party will do so. We may be able to draw on some of the organizations that the analysts have suggested, and we will be able to propose other organizations. We know that we are not obliged to stick to that list and we have to be flexible. It may actually be possible for one group to cover two regions, urban and rural, for example. However, we will not be able to divide them all up like that. But still, we will go through the exercise and give ourselves the opportunity to do our job.
In this situation, we can see the glass half full or half empty. I prefer to see it half full.
As I said at the last meeting, if we have enough witnesses for the six meetings we have scheduled, we should not restrict ourselves. Instead, we should make it possible for us to extend the length of our meetings in preference to increasing the number of them. Other committees do that. Instead of two hours, for example, our meetings could perhaps last three hours. That would give us more time for our study, while still sticking to the number of meeting days we have.