If I may, Mr. Chair, and with your permission, Todd, I was at the Parliament of Westminster a week ago Monday and was fascinated to see how they manage the speaking time of members. As a general rule, when someone is presenting in our Parliament, we usually have 20 minutes or 10 minutes and no interruptions unless the Speaker recognizes another member, but in the British Parliament, when those 20 minutes are allocated to basically a representative of a party on a particular point, that person, while speaking in the chamber, may, in their language, “give way” at any point. If they give way voluntarily—I think it's something we might want to consider for our standing rules—it animates the conversation, because a member who hasn't been recognized by the Speaker....
The Speaker was busy chatting with someone off to the side, and I was wondering what was happening; the proceedings were running amok. People were standing up and interrupting. If they thank the member who's speaking for giving way, and then they ask a question that amplifies one of the points their party wishes to make on the issue at question, it creates a much livelier presentation.
Of course, their Parliament, like ours, does not allow the reading of written speeches, but their Parliament, unlike ours, actually honours this rule. It really helps a speaker who has a big time slot to fill to be able to have a member say.... The day I was there they were debating transit policy and a new bus bill. Labour members would interrupt a Labour member who had the floor, the member would give way, and then the member who had a point would say, “I'm concerned. In my constituency what I hear is that people have trouble affording their bus passes and that sometimes it's even cheaper to take Uber when you have a large family, and what does the member think of that?” Then it goes back to the member who holds the floor.
Anyway, I think it's a wonderful procedure you're using here at the House affairs committee. I thank you, Mr. Chair, for allowing me to say a few words about the procedure you have chosen to use. It certainly has its precedence in the British Parliament, and we might want to consider that it might work well in our Chamber as well as here at this committee.
But, as ever, Mr. Bagnell, a friend of mine for a very long time, you are willing to innovate, and I thank you for it.
I'll now thank Mr. Doherty for the chance to say a few words and listen attentively to the points he has to make. Thank you very much.