Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Do you know what? These ministers have had literally all summer to get ready, hopefully, for whatever their strategic plans and visions are for their respective ministries. As we know, there's a lot of crossover between environment and natural resources, so that's why it's important to have those two ministers come. The motion's pretty clear about their priorities for the return of Parliament and their mandates. If we remove the 15-day piece, it could be next calendar year when they show up, because that could be “as soon as reasonably possible”. It would be nice to have a pretty crystal-clear timeline in here.
Of course, when we say 15 days and they come in 17 days, I don't think that we have to be like, “Oh well, they'll have to change it because of that.” To me, if we say 15 days but they're over by two days, I'm pretty sure no one's going to be upset that we're two days over the timeline, but if we eliminate the days, then I think that just leads to “Oh, this came up. Oh, this came up. Oh, this came up,” and then they don't ever appear. We just don't want that to happen, so I think we can leave the days in there, knowing that if it takes, as I said, 17 days for the minister to come, we're not going to be upset that it was over by a couple of days, right? There's a little bit of latitude there, but I think we need to stay to a prescriptive timeline to make sure that happens and that it gets scheduled into the committee calendar. That way, it's very clear when they're coming and what they're doing. As I said, they've had all summer to get their ducks in a row in terms of what their priorities should be, so it's time for us to hear from them.