Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Genuis will obviously be able to give his own views on the matter in a few moments, but I think the concern of our Conservative friends was that they could not, in two meetings, receive all the witnesses included in the motion, given the problems that Mr. Oliphant referred to earlier about not receiving representatives of both communities at the same time.
However, I am asking a question which I think I am answering by the same token. I think that to ask the question is to answer it.
If we receive the ambassador of Armenia and the representative of Azerbaijan during the first week of the session, they will, of course, want to speak about the general geopolitical situation, but I imagine they will also want to speak about the problems related to the Lachin corridor.
So, in the unanimous agreement that could be reached, we could for now exclude the ambassador of Armenia and the representative of Azerbaijan, who would be heard during the first week of the session and who will certainly want to speak on the blockage of the Lachin corridor. We could try to arrange the next two meetings with the other witnesses who are proposed in the motion.
Does this compromise proposal find favour with all my colleagues? If so, perhaps we have a solution. Mr. Genuis is going to speak just now, I presume, so we will have a little more precise idea in a few seconds.