That kind of resolution is more of an agreement between the parties to ensure there aren't any motions, especially during trips. That is my understanding. There could be a power imbalance. The fact is it's hard to have one member stand in for another in committee during a trip, somewhere else. That's also how it worked during prebudget consultations when we were on the road.
Since we are here now and we have the option of bringing someone in to replace us when we are away and motions are being introduced, I find the compromise that was suggested perfectly acceptable.
I also want to point out that it would be unfortunate not to hear from witnesses who come to make a statement. We certainly should avoid that to the extent possible. I am sure that other things will arise over the course of prebudget consultations. For example, afternoon votes are likely to cut down on the time we have. Unfortunately, it can't be helped.
So far, I think all the parties have acted in good faith. As I see it, we should continue in that spirit and follow the rules of compromise proposed. It doesn't benefit anyone to have witnesses, who have often travelled quite a distance to be with us, show up for nothing. We must hear from them.