To go to that motion, Mr. Chair, again, I go back to the point I've been making all meeting. With the lists the Conservatives have put forward, the amendment that Mr. Barsalou-Duval has put forward, the fact Mr. Bachrach may be going to put something forward, whether it be today or in future meetings, and of course our desire, who queues up within that four-meeting time frame? Who queues up? What gets preference? We have only four meetings. We have only so much time, six per meeting. Who queues up?
That's my point. We need a meeting to identify, within those four meetings, as per Mr. Bachrach's motion, who in fact would fit into those time slots. Again, it's about fairness. We have a list here from the Conservatives. That's great. Now we have a list from Mr. Barsalou-Duval. Okay. That takes the time slots from those meetings. Of course, we're going to come forward with a list. Who queues up? Who's the priority? This is why we are requesting a business planning session, a subcommittee meeting. Whether it's in camera or not is not my concern. The bottom line, however, is that we have to establish fairness in terms of who's going to be brought forward and, with that, who's going to have priority in queuing up. There are only so many minutes and hours in a meeting. Who's going to occupy those meetings out of the names that are going to be brought forward by all the parties?
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.