Just for the benefit of the critic, first of all, thank you for the consensus we were able to work out here. I do admit that I went a little overboard in laying out the third and fourth rounds just in case we have a scenario where we have two-hour witnesses.
I just want to point out to the critic that uniquely under this format, the official opposition in the first two rounds has an opportunity for each committee member to actually speak to a witness. The third party is identified as having a place in those first two rounds. We have six members on this side and not all six members will be able to participate in the first two rounds. So I feel comfortable with the rationale behind that and I have no further comments with respect to this.