Okay. I would like to speak to it.
I had the pleasure of sitting on the ethics committee with my friend from the Bloc, where we heard from the Ethics Commissioner, as well as from the former chair prior to her resigning. I remember being really disappointed. That's probably not a good word. I was concerned by and disappointed with the way she conducted herself at that committee. This was someone who had a history, going back to the Harper years, of being appointed to boards and advisory committees, and I pointed out to her that even if she got advice to the contrary, she should have known better and recused herself.
I don't think there's any disagreement among the parties on this. She did not behave in the way she should have. She's not new to the role. I could be mistaken about this, but I think she was appointed under former prime minister Martin, then under the Harper government and then under ours. She's someone who came with the experience, and she should have known better.
I don't think we need two hours with each of them. If somebody added up all the hours both of these individuals testified at different committees in the House of Commons.... I think you should hear from them, certainly, but I think an hour for each one would be sufficient.
I'd like to amend Mr. Villemure's amendment to one meeting of one hour each, if I could, Chair. Is that appropriate right now?