I think I do. I was tempted to say the prioritization piece sounds subcommittee-ish to me, but this committee will decide if it wants to do that or not.
I think this simply places this as one of the buffet items that the committee is going to get to. We decide now first what people want to study and what they don't want to study, and then the next step is in what order and how much time, which I don't think we'll get to today. Is it two weeks? Is it four weeks? Maybe. I dare to dream.
But I don't get any sense that Mr. Amos' motion is done in sequence, because there may be some on the government or opposition side who want to put number two as number one. I don't read his motion as a sequential offer, take it or leave it, because that wouldn't make a lot of sense.