Excuse me, colleagues, but before we carry on with Mr. Christopherson's amendment to Mr. D'Amours' motion, I should point out that we initiated the discussion with the options that were available. I thought I heard the committee say that you wanted to explore as many of them as possible. One of the items we raised was the question of an expanded witness list that the steering committee was going to go through tomorrow and that was already on the schedule.
What Madame Faille is suggesting is that it be part of the motion. I'm not sure that's necessary inasmuch as we had already agreed to put it on the steering committee's agenda, and the steering committee can make that decision. If it is the entire committee's will to make the decision today, that's fine, but we already have it on an agenda.
The reason I say this is that I don't think that Mr. Christopherson or Mr. D'Amours intended to pre-empt a continuance of this study. They are just looking at another step that would require the approval of the committee.
Okay, Mr. Christopherson?
Okay, Madame Faille?