I've gotten confused now.
I think we're looking for the committee to do the job they feel they need to do, in terms of how long it takes. As you said, there is a one-year legislative timeline.
We think the travelling is important; we think a comprehensive and thorough review is important. But at the same time, we as well want to see a report come out of this Parliament and we want to see you be able to make your timelines and get the job done.
In terms of travel, I think part of travel is being able to go to the people and not have to always bring the people to Ottawa. As well, it is being able to see in this vast geography the kinds of realities that are out there, such as by looking at first nations communities both in the south and in the north, because they are a particularly vulnerable group, and northern first nation communities have very different issues from those some of the southern first nation communities have.
Regionally, going out to Sydney in the Maritimes is going to be an interesting fact-finding exercise--or to Alberta, with the oil and gas industry.
So I think partly it's getting to see the reality on the ground, and part of it is being able to go to the people in various areas to get a sense of how pollution is impacting them, both in terms of their environment and in terms of their health.
Could you go back again to talking about the timeline and the virtual elimination...?