Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Obviously we all understand why Mr. Siksay is not comfortable with the proposal. It has nothing to do with his personal contribution, but we need to set the rules, regardless of the individuals who are here.
You might not be here at the next meeting, Mr. Siksay. You might have a replacement. So it has nothing to do with the individuals who are members of the committee; it has to do with establishing rules that apply fairness to everybody, and I think the main motion proposes something that I've seen other committees do. After the first amendment has been amended again, I don't see a problem with it, making it five minutes.
As far as the second amendment is concerned, I don't really agree with it. I think the idea here is to give everybody the opportunity to speak, including the opportunity to give their time to somebody else, and also to have a fair representation of all the parties represented in committee before the second round is started. It would be unfair if the NDP gets three or four chances while they have only one seat on the committee, while the other parties have more seats and fewer chances.
Thank you.