The motion is for the witnesses we've heard, for the same reasons I've argued, that we don't necessarily need to go through this process. I also agree that if we are going to go through the process, we hear from the witnesses we've heard from. Certainly by way of extension, anyone else who wants to comment can write in their concerns to the committee and have those concerns added to the record.
I believe this will be the longest I've ever spent on a private member's bill in terms of the number of meetings. It's certainly the first time we'll have listened to the same witnesses on multiple occasions. It's already somewhat unprecedented. I think we ought to move forward as the motion presents and schedule the witnesses that came before us to come before us again.
It should take two meetings. I think we only had two meetings with witnesses. Were there witnesses in the second hour of the first meeting? I can't remember. I think we should be able to fit it in over two meetings and then go clause by clause in the third.
I don't think we need to have the officials come before us again until clause-by-clause. They can add their opinions during clause-by-clause.