I've had some casual conversations with some of you. Mr. Cannis and I have had a meeting, and I've met with the parliamentary secretary and some of our other colleagues with regard to where we proceed from here.
We do have a motion that's been proposed. That could be dealt with today or on Thursday. My inclination would be that, as soon as we can, we should get to a discussion of future business and where we're going to go.
We kind of ended up at a point where we had concluded much of what we had begun, other than bills that were expected to come before the committee. Obviously, the next thing of consequence that is up is Colombia. I presume that at some point it will come back to the committee. I think we probably will be getting a bill on Panama at some point, too. We've looked at that. Jordan will be coming back to the committee.
I don't expect that these will be particularly controversial, other than the fact that there are some ongoing concerns with Colombia. Hopefully, Mr. Cannis' lunch will resolve all of that, and we can get through the Colombia bill rather quickly when that happens.
In any event, it's going to be a while before we get Colombia back on this table. In the meantime, I'm open to suggestions. Those I have received so far seem to be in new directions. As for where the government might be considering going in the future, I think we had expressed an interest previously about the EU and proceeding further with consideration of that. I think India is also on the drawing board. Brazil seems to have slowed down a bit with regard to their interest in pursuing MERCOSUR, but in any event, that's not off the table for discussion by this committee.
Those are some of the suggestions. I'd like people to give more thought to general directions on where we'd like to go so that we can perhaps do at least an 11- or 10-week plan on Thursday. With regard to Thursday, I think that shouldn't take the whole meeting, and we could probably get under way with the discussion of the first agenda item. It may coincidently work with Mr. Julian's motion.
Mr. Julian has offered a motion to do with Canada-U.S. matters. One of the thoughts we had talked about is a broader study by this committee, for the next two months anyway, and virtually an ongoing study, of Canada-U.S. relations, because this has been so critical and so pivotal to trade relations in Canada. It has also been suggested that we take advantage of our Washington opportunities--that is, by way of our travel vouchers--to visit as a committee at least once a year.
I think we were all in agreement that we had a very successful visit the last time around. With the help of the embassy, it was rather well structured, and I think we got a lot out of that meeting, but at the same time, I think it almost invited many more questions than we were able to get to.
But I think the primary interest is really in establishing and continuing to maintain the personal relationships between us, as elected representatives, and elected representatives in Congress in the United States. For that reason, those are the thoughts I've been having. I have had discussions with some of you on this. That would cause us to have this as an ongoing study when we're not debating or considering bills before the committee, and then, in the course of the next weeks, we might decide which future target we may want to pursue, whether it's the EU, or Brazil again, or India.
With those opening comments, I believe it's up to your judgment.
I should just say, Mr. Julian, that if you're anxious to get started on your motion, I'm happy to deal with it today, but I believe that for the discussion, it may be that we just want to perhaps introduce it or bring it in on Thursday rather than have an extended discussion today. I'm not sure that we're ready to make a decision on it today. I'll leave it to your judgment as to whether you want to bring it up today.
Before we get to that, are people generally in agreement with where I'm going?
Can I get your comments, John?