Thank you very much.
To the witnesses, thank you for coming. Thank you as always for your almost therapeutic approach to this huge topic, where you bring hope and concrete suggestions. We thank you for that. We thank you for all the work you've done.
We want to make sure that you give us some homework for the summer, the things you think we need to have read by the time we come back in the fall. I hope at that time you will give us a test regarding all of the recommendations in your fact sheets.
The workbook that was produced from the wonderful conference you held in April in Edmonton was extraordinary. We were very blessed that the Library of Parliament took it upon themselves to send our analysts. So thank you for being there. I hope that all who couldn't be there might be provided with a copy of the workbook, which I think really sets the tone for the work we need to do together.
I also thank you for remembering the women and girls that have been lost, and the families who now have this big hole.
My questions will be mainly about how we can work together, in terms of making sure we're always focused on the human face, as you said; how, as we do our work, we can continue to keep up to date on the women lost on a weekly basis; keeping a focus on the families; and the need for a special event. I don't know what your advice would be around the October 4 vigil—whether there would be a way to receive them as they come to the Hill. If you have some advice about that and about travel—in the motion the committee is prepared to travel and if you had advice for the committee as to whether that should be the Highway of Tears, or whether you feel the testimony in the previous studies has been done—we hope for your wise counsel.
As well, we are going to need to work together in terms of how the witness list is drawn up. As you say, it's not only about adding people to the witness list but how it's organized in our work. I would welcome your expertise as to who would be the better witnesses for each of the three areas and what would constitute a better panel. I am having a bit of trouble with the format of three witnesses for one hour each. Look at how the time has flown this evening. We have just the three of you and almost two hours has gone by already.
I would hope that you would work with the chair and the clerk and the analysts to give us your very best recommendations. We have put in our witness list but perhaps you could help organize this for us. I think that if they're helter-skelter all over the place, we're not going to get the stories and the narrative in a way that is in keeping with the work you've already done.
I also think that in your Evidence to Action...I would like us at some point to deal with the role of government, what works, what doesn't work, what costs money, what costs too much money, what costs nothing at all. In a national action plan, how would you get this interface between all the work that's been done on the ground and what government needs to be doing? We are always thinking about the recommendations that would come from here.
One other area that we heard a bit about was the Oskayak youth conference. Madam Goodwin was talking about young women and girls fleeing foster care and that's probably not been well done in Parliament. There's the huge effect of what happens if someone has to flee abusive or violent situations and that begets the cycle....
Other than with three appearances at the committee, do you have any thoughts on how you think we could work together between those appearances?