Thanks.
Look, I think we should get through it. As folks have said, let's adopt the budget.
I think what might be helpful, though, is this: I'm new to this committee as well, so I don't know how much the subcommittee is used to set an agenda going forward. I would be genuinely interested in sitting down with colleagues from the Conservatives, the Bloc and the NDP. We could do it in a setting like this. It's already late, so I don't think now is the exact time. However, I'd be curious to know what more we want to get out of this. How much evidence have we heard? Is it sufficient? What more do we need to hear? Who do we need to hear from?
Obviously, there's a proposal to hear from certain witnesses, but I outlined some things that I think are gaps. Maybe it's already there, but there are some gaps in my understanding. I've started to read a bit more about the missing emails, for example, that Mr. Brock was mentioning. I have to fill in some gaps on my end. To the extent that we need to fill in additional gaps across the board in order to get to the bottom of what we want to get to the bottom of, both on Sustainable Development Technology Canada and ArriveCAN, there have been a boatload of meetings already. It might be helpful to have a subcommittee meeting at some point in order to get folks to drill down, work across the aisle and say what more we want to get out of this—shared goals, accountability, who else we need to hear from, what documents we need to request and how we conclude this thing collectively. That's how I've operated on other committees where we tried to play that kind of accountability function, I think, successfully.
Otherwise, yes, let's adopt the budget. However, I think there's a more constructive way to be on the same page, going forward.