Yes and no.
Yes, the lists submitted by members do get higher priority on the basis that these are people we want to hear from. We have generally established on this committee that the clerk will deal with these requests. This case is a bit unusual, because we have been studying this bill on and off for quite some time and have heard many of the witnesses.
To answer your first question, Monsieur Laforest, yes, we do give some priority to members' lists, because those are people we want to hear from, and that's obvious by the submission of those names by members of Parliament.
We also have people who approach the committee on their own. We have no particular way of knowing, in some cases, if these people have any expertise at all or just want a free trip to Ottawa and be able to put on their resumé that they were an expert witness.
It's not as if we've put an ad in the paper asking for anybody who wants to comment on this. No; if there are people whom we'd like to have appear before the committee, with reasonable credentials and something to say, particularly if it's something we haven't heard before, they're welcome to come. But we're not going to go on ad nauseam hearing from everybody who's got an opinion. We are interested in seeking information, particularly new information, from people who have a basis of understanding of the subject.
That's it in a nutshell. At this point we haven't been exclusive in any way. The clerk has been quite busy trying to line people up. I'm grateful to the people today, and I should say, in their defence, that in some cases it's been on quite short notice.
To the witnesses, thank you for your patience and being able to come on short notice to appear today.
So we're at it, and we've got another week or two to fit in witnesses. If there's somebody you particularly want, I would let the clerk know.