Thank you, Madam Chair.
I would like to ask whether three hours per minister is really reasonable. It strikes me that we can hear salient points in less than three hours. I'm wondering why the specificity—“for three hours”. It seems an invitation for repetition, and frankly, I just cannot imagine that even with the most intense questioning there will be a need for three hours per minister.
I would prefer to have the kind of flexibility that I believe is being proposed—that essentially we have each of them appear before the committee—and not necessarily tie ourselves down to a three-hour time slot.