Thank you, Madam Chair, and thanks to my friend down the way.
I chaired a committee as well. I'm one who is inclined in the other direction. I find that the subcommittees, particularly in cases where they achieve a consensus, are able to work quickly. It's a much more informal conversation because there are fewer people. I totally respect Ed's view that there have been some committees, particularly the more contentious they are, where consensus is rarely achieved, so the subcommittee does work, and then you have to bring it back to the full committee for the passing of an agenda anyway.
I would propose that at least we start off on the subcommittee path, because many committees worked that way in the past, and see if that consensus model works okay and that we aren't referring back and repeating the conversation. I think maybe that's the thing Ed is worried about, that you end up repeating conversations if there isn't a lot of collegiality. It always comes back to the larger committee anyway; it's not as if the subcommittee can entirely be its own power.
At least give it a few months to see how it works and then return back to this, which we can always do as a committee, and change the way we do business.