Okay.
In response to some earlier questions, you were talking about the composition of committees. I understand your proposal to have it looked at in terms of how the chairs would be comprised, but in response to an earlier question, you were sort of talking about the makeup of the committee itself. You were indicating that basically the whips choose the membership of the committee, and therefore you felt that having the committee choose the chair didn't, I guess, allow for the members of the House of Commons to have enough freedom in determining who the chair would be. I think that was the gist of what you were trying to say there.
You were indicating that the whips choose the committee itself. In fact it's actually this committee, of course, that chooses the makeup of the committees. I understand you're suggesting there's some input that comes from other places, maybe the whip or other places. I get that. But you seemed to be alluding to the fact that you felt maybe the committees needed to be appointed differently from how they currently are as well.
Am I correct in that assessment? Or what was your suggestion in terms of how the committees themselves would be made up?