It's interesting. That is almost the exact wording of the amendment we just defeated.
In terms of format then, in the second round of questioning, if I've already asked one in the first round, does that mean I don't get permission to ask one in the second round, until every single person on the committee has asked a question?
It's just to be clear here. I was actually comfortable with this original amendment. The original motion was based on what existed in the Standing Orders, which works for every committee around here, and even though I know half the time, if not more, I lose my second round of questioning because we run out of time, I was prepared to accept that. If what you're now suggesting is a deviation from everything else that other committees use and that I won't get my second round of questioning.... Just pay attention to the dynamic that people are trying to establish here for some inability of individual parties not to share their questions amongst themselves. We know some members are good at it and some members aren't. But that should not be at the behest of other parties on the committee to account for. If you can't share your time, maybe one should wonder how much time you're taking in your preamble to ask your question.
So all I'm suggesting is that if you take this route to this potential that all 13 members get to ask a question before it comes back around again, so be it.