Thank you, Chair.
I guess I'm a little bit confused now. When the motion was originally being introduced, it talked about deep ocean drilling in the Canadian context. To me, the Canadian context means deep ocean drilling anywhere. It could be offshore, in the north, or anywhere. I guess my concern is that before we finish something like this, if we have only British Petroleum, we have only British Petroleum's viewpoint on the world. There are many other companies doing deep ocean drilling. Maybe some of the principles and practices being used by some of these other companies are worthy of our consideration, and the companies would be worthy parts of the witness list. That's one of my concerns about not having a complete witness list. That's the first thing.
The second thing is, as part of this, what does the committee intend to produce out of this, or what does Mr. Cullen think we would produce out of this? Is it going to be a report? Is it just going to be testimony from a couple of days' worth of witnesses that we would bring in?
Until I can feel we have this nailed down, it's going to be a little bit hard for me to agree to that. If we are dealing with deep ocean drilling in Canada--and response mechanisms, because different companies could have different response mechanisms as well--I think we need to take that into consideration and have at least a few different companies in here that we can propose.
I agree with the NEB. That's not a big problem. I agree with that. But I think we should be looking at a little bit broader context with regard to witnesses, and should at least consider some others.