I just want to clarify what my thinking was.
The reason I proposed two to four meetings initially wasn't to wrap up the debate after four meetings. It was actually to give us time afterwards for specific studies on those three issues. The benefit of an omnibus study is that it lays the groundwork, but there seems to be a consensus among the committee members that we should take a deep dive into the three issues right away. I have no objection, then, to amending my amendment so that it refers to a maximum of eight meetings. That is what you suggested, is it not Mr. Dhaliwal?
If so, I'm happy to support the subamendment.