Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Bachrach is correct, partially, in terms of the discussion at the subcommittee. However, as the clerk has stated, anything that happens at subcommittee has to be ratified at committee, period. That was my whole point of bringing it to the subcommittee. It's so we don't burn meetings.
Now that this motion was brought forward, and in fairness to all parties around this table including the presenters of the motion, it gives us all the opportunity to look at our list that we submitted to the clerk and revisit those lists to see who we would otherwise summon to this meeting.
The motion that I brought up earlier goes to Mr. Bachrach's point, which I think is valid. We just passed a motion, by you, sir, that limits us to four meetings. When are we going to have that discussion, in fairness to all the parties, to divvy up the time within those four meetings for the people that we all may want to summon?
We asked 11 witnesses to come out. Only one came out. We would like to revisit that and possibly summon one of those 10 to come out. That's fair. You may want to do the same. The Bloc may want to do the same. The fairness here is to go into a subcommittee meeting and, within that four-meeting time slot, give everyone the opportunity to put a list forward to summon. If we pass this motion now, we won't have that opportunity.
That's all we're asking for. It's to simply go into business planning in subcommittee. I'm looking at the list right now and I see names on here that I would love to summon to come out. Patrick Brown, the mayor of Brampton, didn't even respond. I would love to be able to summon someone like that.