I've observed the time during Mr. Poilievre's opportunity to have an intervention here.
I've served as a member of Parliament for 10 years. I've served on a number of committees.
I have great respect for you, Mr. Chair. However, I would ask that you give us a bit more of a clear ruling on this.
It's based on this. On the committees I've sat on in the past, generally what I've seen the chair do is exercise the prerogative of the person with the time—the member—to use that time as they wish. If they feel that they need to move to an answer because a witness is taking too long and those kinds of things, they are able to do just that. I've always seen that. It's been the practice I've seen through 10 years on a number of different committees.
What I would ask, Mr. Chair.... I understand from what you've indicated what you believe the ruling should be, but could you please provide us with some documentation from O'Brien and Bosc, or somewhere, that would indicate why that ruling is being done? It certainly differs from the convention I've seen on every other committee I've sat on.