Thank you, Mr. Chair.
The question I have, and the comment--and the mover can say forget it or not--is that if we're going to do concurrent meetings, I'd rather have concurrent meetings, to be frank with you, on the Investment Canada Act and on the CRTC decision. We'd get those meetings done with and then we'd move to the private member's bill. Doing that would still move the private member's bill up sooner. There's no doubt about it.
I'm not a big fan of concurrent meetings, but if we're going to do them--and this obviously will pass one way or another--I think we should get started on the Investment Canada piece. I think in your own arguments you said that we don't know how many meetings there will be, and we may have to have a fairly long invitation period for people to come if they're coming from overseas, and so on. So why would we not do that? If the committee has decided that we're going to go in the format of concurrent meetings, then on one day we'll study one item and on the next we'll study the next different item, and go back and forth. We've all agreed that those are two big items for us. Let's do the concurrent meetings with those two big items. We'll get those done--maybe not by the first break but by the second--and then we'll deal with Bill C-568.
That is my suggestion.