Well, I don't see the reason for these changes. In my experience with parliamentary committees, the clerks have been diligent in getting the motions out, and the time of having it deposited with the clerk works quite well. Generally speaking, the member who is putting a motion forward and who has sent a copy to the clerk is usually—if he is looking for support from other parties—notifying the other parties, so I don't think there's a problem there. I don't think that side of the amendment has any valid argument.
On the question of the 24 hours or the 48 hours, I have a hard time seeing what the difference is, because the 24 is, in effect, 48 with the meetings being every second day. Now, there could be some times when you'd have additional sittings in those periods, and that 24 would come into play there at that time, but when that happens, the members are quite engaged and they're not surprised by any of those motions; they are around the table to discuss and they are following the subject, so I would believe 24 hours is plenty of time to have the discussion among the parties and do the studies. That amount of time has worked well in the past. I don't see the compelling reason to change that rule.