I agree with Lawrence. It does happen that I agree with him from time to time.
This is how I understand the notice of motion. When we're discussing an issue, for example small craft harbours, another subject could be of interest to one of the members of the committee. If that occurs, the motion, or the notice of motion can be tabled. With respect to an amendment or a subamendment regarding a given discussion, anything is possible because the topic is already being discussed. For example, if we are dealing with the seal hunt, small craft harbours, the catastrophe facing ground fish fishers, or anything else, there is nothing preventing us from tabling a notice of motion. In my opinion, a notice of motion prevents us from talking about any other subject that does not tie in to the subject being discussed then and there. However, there is nothing preventing us from tabling a notice of motion on a particular subject that could be discussed at a future meeting.
I am more in favour of maintaining the status quo, because I believe that it accommodates our committee. I do, however, want to point out to Randy that the current format allows for a certain level of flexibility on holding discussions. This format is effective because a member cannot table a motion on any given subject when we are discussing a specific topic.