In conclusion, I would like to speak briefly about two points. First, I am entirely aware that we can't conduct a study in one meeting. So I know that it will be done in the fall. That said, if it's done in the fall, we'll have to make structural changes. There is a slight delay, but if, through the study, we could at least prevent that from happening in the coming years, that will already be an enormous step forward.
The second point I wanted to raise refers to what Mr. Petit and others have mentioned. This study and the motion are very broad because I wanted them to be broad. We're going to look everywhere. There will be no political finger-pointing. There may be political content, discussions that focus on political will, just as we may talk about the mechanisms that must be respected. You'll be able to help us on that point. We will ask officials to testify who will explain to us how things work internally.
When the application is received, to whom is it transferred? Does it stay on top of a pile or is it sent to someone else? We don't know anything about all that. It's broad because we have to get to the bottom of things in order to understand exactly what happens inside the government machine. It's not to point the finger at someone, but rather to change things so this doesn't happen again. That's the purpose of the motion.